Loading...
78 WEBB STREET - BUILDING INSPECTION F 18 WEBB STREET rsuperob. Love-L"& M M EAD® KEEPING YOU ORGANIZED No. 10301 PMWP'EMM ta� N1NLyt7ID CGMIBRIOR nouaa MAOENU6A GETOROMOMMSI EMMM Certificate Number: B-16-710 Permit Number: B-16-710 Commonwealth of Massachusetts City of Salem This is to Certify that the ..................................................................ACC Land Building........................................................... located at Building Type .......................................................................�8-A-A...WEBB STREET....................................................................... in the .....................................City of Salem............................................... ................. Address Town/City Name IS HEREBY GRANTED A PERMANENT CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY Two units Unit #1 and unit #2 JAMES SHEA This Permit is granted in conformity with the Statutes and Ordinances relating thereto, and expires ...............................NotApplicable. unless sooner suspended or revoked. Expiration Date Issued On: Thursday, June 01, 2017 Commonwealth of Massachusetts , r r City of Salem -, - 120 Washington St,3rd Floor Salem,MA 01970(978)745-9595 x5641 Return card to Building Division for Certificate of Occupancy Permit No. B-16-710 PERMIT TO BUILD FEE PAID: $1,750.00 DATE ISSUED: 7/20/2016 This certifies that SHEA JAMES has permission to erect, alter, or demolish,a building. - ,78-A-A_WEBB STREET Map/Lot: 350590-0 as follows: New Construction - 1-2 Family CONSTRUCT A NEW, TWO FAMILY HOME OVER EXISTING BUILDING WITH ZBA APPROVAL ON FILE. Contractor Name: JAMES W. SHEA DBA: PROFESSIONAL ROOFING CONTRACTORS 1 Contractor License No: CS-019729 /j 7/20/2016 Building Official Date This permit shall be deemed abandoned and invalid unless the work authorized by this permit is commenced within six months after issuance.The Building Official may grant one or more extensions not to exceed six months each upon written request. \ All work authorized by this permit shall conform to the approved application and the approved construction documents for which\this permit has been granted. All construction,alterations and changes of use of any building and structures shall be in compliance with the local zoning by-laws and codes. t This permit shall be displayed in a location clearly visible from access street or road and shall be maintained open for public inspection for the entire duration of the work until the completion of the same. The Certificate of Occupancy will not be issued until all applicable signatures by the Building and Fire Otficials,are provided on this permit. HIC#: "Persons contracting with unregistered contractors do not have access to the guaranty fund"(asset forth in MGL c.142A). Restrictions: Building plans are to be available on site. All Permit Cards are the property of the PROPERTY OWNER. Commonwealth of Massachusetts i ` a Citv of Salem 120 Washington Sl,3rd Floor Salem,MA 01970(978)745-9595 x5641 Return card to Building Division for Certificate of Occupancy Structure CITY OF SALEM BUILDING PERMIT ' Excavation PERMIT TO BE POSTED IN THE WINDOW Footing INSPECTION RECORD Foundation Framing Ohl Mechanical /` / J Insulation Zr . INSPECTION: BY DATE Chimney/Smoke Chamber Final I �A / -'Plumbing/Gas Rough:Plumbing Q/t Rough:Gas Final IL. Electrical Service Rough Final /J ' re epartment Preliminary W-V MA Final 0 Health Department Preliminary Final 4& a �0 Daniel H. Pierce & J. Tracy Pierce 22 Andrew Street Salem, MA 01970-4004 19 O 2 MAR 2 0 2003 17 March 2003 C Y, F 91 1W Mr. Thomas St. Pierre NI+ C� ac" R'S Inspector of Buildings & Zoning Enforcement Officer City of Salem 120 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 Property Location: 78A Webb.Street, R-2 Zoning district Petitioner: James Shea d/b/a Professional Roofing Subject: Withdrawal of Petition to the City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeal for Special Permit / Variances from minimum lot area, minimum lot area per dwelling, lot coverage and number of stories to allow construction of a 2 family residence. Dear Mr. St. Pierre: On.19 February 2003;1 we attended the Zoning-Board.of Appeals public.meeting;_to-hear,the continuation-.of'theTetition of James.'Shea regarding,:78A Webb Street as;referenced above: r However, it`was*announced at the opening of the public-.meeting that,the Petitioner.had withdrawn his Petition to the'Board'of.Appeal. Unfortunately, we were unable to attend the prior public meeting on 15 January 2003. As a result, on January 14th, we hand-delivered a letter of objection to the Clerk of the Board with the understanding that our would be read into the public record at the meeting scheduled for January 15. We were later disappointed to learn that our letter had in fact not been read or recognized at the public meeting, although a copy was later found in the file for the subject Petition. Since the Petitioner has withdrawn his Petition to the Board of Appeals, there would appear to be no reason to record our 14 January 2003 letter of objection to this Petition. However, we have since learned that the Petitioner has been advised that he can proceed with constructing the proposed project after approval of a building permit, and that no further review and approval by the Zoning Board of Appeals would be required. We do not agree with such a finding, and are confident the Petitioner's interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance is totally_incorrect and inconsistent with the intent of Chapter 40A of the General Laws of Massachusetts. Accordingly, this letter is submitted for your careful consideration in the review of the Petitioner's anticipated application to proceed with changes to the existing nonconforming property and use. As homeowners at 22 Andrew Street and neighbors of the subject property, we strenuously object to the approval of any Building Permits;.Variances or Special.Permits that the Petitioner may.request to construct a 2-unit residential building at 78A Webb.Street in Salem., We.request that you deny any Building'Permit Application:which would coustitute;a:change in use-or' enlarge or alter the existing structure ink way which "increases its nonconformity", and we request you notify JN Mr. Thomas St. Pierre, Inspector of Buildings & Zoning Enforcement Officer City of Salem 17 March 2003 Page 2 the Petitioner that he must return to the Board of Appeals for approval of applicable Variances and Special Permits as stipulated by the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance, based on the following provisions of the Ordinance: 1. Permitted Uses, R-2 District (Sec. 5-2): The existing structure located on the property is a "Private Garage" which is only permitted in R-2 two-family residential districts as an accessory use when it is "clearly incidental to the principal use." 2. Article VIII - Nonconformity (Sec. 8-1 Intent): The intent of the Zoning Ordinance adopted in 1965 was to allow the continuation of nonconforming buildings and uses which existing prior to the adoption of the Ordinance and to require approval of Special Permits or Variances when enlargement or alteration of a nonconforming structure or use is proposed (as provided in Section 9-4). The land and 3-car private garage structure located at 78A Webb Street was initially subdivided from the 2-family residence at 78 Webb Street by the owners Richard S. and Gertrude C. Martin on 1 October 1963. Ownership of 78 Webb Street was transferred to Robert M. and Kathleen H. Martin for less than $100, while ownership of 78A Webb Street was retained by Richard S. and Gertrude C. Martin. While the 2-family residence at 78 Webb Street transferred ownership five times between 1963 and 1985, the 3-car garage located at 78A Webb Street remained in the Martin family until 1972 when it was sold to Robert P. McNeill. McNeill later sold the garage to James Shea d/b/a Professional Roofing on 8 March 1983. The above has been confirmed by review of Registry of Deeds records. In addition, the first record of 78A Webb Street in the Polk Salem City Directory occurs in 1971. No business name or business use is identified. The property is identified for the first time as being a separate and distinct lot from the adjacent 78 Webb Street. In conclusion, since the private garage is not incidental to a residential use that currently exists or previously existed at the time of amnesty or the "grandfathering" of all pre- existing nonconforming uses and structures in 1965, the current private garage building and use is a "Nonconformity" as defined by Article VIII of the Zoning Ordinance, and as such, any proposed changes after 1965 to said nonconforming structure requires Zoning Board of Appeals approval. 3. Nonconforming Lot (Sec. 8-2): With only 1194 square feet in area, the lot is substantially below the minimum 5000 square feet of area required by the Zoning Ordinance. In addition, with only 28 feet of lot frontage, the lot is far below the minimum 50 feet of frontage required by the Ordinance. Subparagraph (1) of Section 8-2 stipulates that lots which could not otherwise be built upon for residential purposes under the terms of the Ordinance by reason of restricted lot area or lot width, may be used for one or two-family residential use if it meets the following provisions: • at the time of recording or endorsement of the Ordinance (1965), the lot was not held in common ownership with any adjoining land; and J Mr. Thomas St. Pierre, Inspector of Buildings & Zoning Enforcement Officer City of Salem 17 March 2003 Page 3 • the lot conformed to then-existing requirements; and • the lot has at least 5000 square feet of lot area and 50 feet of frontage. In conclusion, the subject property does not meet the stipulated provisions of Section 8-2 and is therefore not a buildable lot for residential purposes. The existing lot, building and use remain nonconforming, and therefore any proposed change to the existing nonconforming building or use must comply with the current Zoning Ordinance. 4. Nonconforming Use of Land (Sec. 8-3): Although no longer permissible under the present Zoning Ordinance, the existing use may be continued so long as it remains otherwise lawful, and is not "enlarged, increased or extended to occupy a greater area of land than was occupied in 1965. 5. Nonconforming Structure (Sec. 8-4): A pre-existing structure which could not otherwise be built under the terms of the Ordinance by reasons of restrictions on area, lot coverage, height, yard dimensions, location on the lot, etc., may be continued so long as it remains otherwise lawful, and is not enlarged or altered in any way which increases its nonconformity or which increases its height except as provided for in Section 8-6. 6. Nonconforming Use of Structure (Sec. 8-5): As neighbors on Andrew Street, we have been concerned for years that the structure is unlawfully being used for "storage of building supplies" which is not allowed in an R-2 District under the terms of the Ordinance. Such use of a structure is only permitted in B-4 and I Districts. The use of a pre-existing nonconforming structure may be continued so long as it remains otherwise lawful, and: • the structure is not enlarged, extended, constructed, reconstructed, moved or structurally altered, except when changing the use to a use which is permitted in the district; and • if no structural alterations are made, the nonconforming use of the structure may be changed to another nonconforming use, provided that the Board of Appeals finds that the proposed use is equally or more appropriate to the district than the existing nonconforming use; and • if the nonconforming use is superseded by a permitted use, the structure must conform to the regulations for the district, and the nonconforming use may not be resumed; and • if the nonconforming use is abandoned or not used for a period of 2 years, the nonconforming use and structure shall lose whatever rights might otherwise exist to its continuation. However, the current use as "storage of building supplies" is not grandfathered because it did not exist at time of passage of the Zoning Ordinance in 1965. In conclusion, we still contend that the use of the building and lot for anything other than storage Mr. Thomas St. Pierre, Inspector of Buildings & Zoning Enforcement Officer City of Salem 17 March 2003 Page 4 appropriate to a residential use is not permitted by the Ordinance and therefore the current use by Professional Roofing for "storage of building supplies" is unlawful. As was originally brought to the attention of the Inspector of Buildings in May of 1993, we again request that a "cease and desist" order be issued to the owner of the subject property if, following your inspection of said premises, it is determined that the building is being used illegally. 7. Board of Appeals - Granting Special Permits (Sections 8-6 and 9-4): The Board of Appeals may grant a Special Permit for a change to another nonconforming use or for its alteration or enlargement, provided that the Board finds that the use as changed, altered or extended will not depart from the intent of the Ordinance and its prior use or degree of use, and provided that the building or use is neither increased in volume nor area unreasonably. In conclusion, first, we do not believe that the any proposed change of use, alteration or enlargement of the subject property shall be approved or authorized except by granting of Special Permits and/or Variances by the Zoning Board of Appeals as stipulated in the Zoning Ordinance. Second, with regard to any future application by the owner of 78A Webb Street to the Zoning Board of Appeals for approval to change the nonconforming structure and use to a conforming residential use, we contend that the owner will not be able to demonstrate that any hardships exist which would satisfy the requirements of Section 9-5 of the Ordinance. Therefore, since the granting of Special Permits and/or Variances for the subject Petition would incur substantial detriment to the public good and would nullify the intent of the district and the purpose of the Zoning Ordinance, we will continue to speak out in opposition to the subject Petition or any similar Petition to the Zoning Board of Appeals, and we will request that the Board of Appeals deny any request for Variances or Special Permits. Thank you for your support and your commitment to adhering to the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. If you have any questions or comments concerning the points raised in this letter, please do not hesitate to contact us. Respectfully, aniel H. Pier e J. Tracy Pierce copy: Mayor Stanley J. Usovicz, Jr. Regina Flynn, Councillor Ward Two John Keenan Esquire, City Solicitor a J Daniel H. Pierce & J. Tracy Pierce 22 Andrew Street Salem, MA 01970-4004 17 March 2003 Mr. Thomas St. Pierre Inspector of Buildings & Zoning Enforcement Officer City of Salem 120 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 Property Location: 78A Webb Street, R-2 Zoning district Petitioner: James Shea d/b/a Professional Roofing Subject: Withdrawal of Petition to the City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeal for Special Permit / Variances from minimum lot area, minimum lot area per dwelling, lot coverage and number of stories to allow construction of a 2 family residence. Dear Mr. St. Pierre: On. 19 February:2003,rwe attended the:Zonmg Board;of Appeals public.meetmg. to,hear the continuatiom.of the Petition-of,James Sheaxegarding 78A Webb Street as-referenced above However, it;was^announced at,the;opening of the,public,meeting that the.Petitioner had withdrawn; his Petition to the:Boar&of'Appeal Unfortunately, we were unable to attend the prior public:meeting on 15.January 2003. As a result, on January 14th, we hand-delivered a letter of objection to the Clerk of the Board with the understanding that our would be read into the public record at the meeting scheduled for January 15. We were later disappointed to learn that our letter had in fact not been read or recognized at the public meeting, although a.copy was later found in the file for the subject Petition. Since the Petitioner,has withdrawn his Petition to the Board of Appeals, there would appear to be no reason to record our 14 January 2003 letter of objection to this Petition. However, we have since learned that the Petitioner has been advised that he can proceed with constructing the proposed project after approval of a building permit, and that no further review and approval by the Zoning Board of Appeals would be required. We do not agree with such a finding, and are confident the Petitioner's interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance is totally incorrect and inconsistent with the intent of Chapter 40A of the General Laws of Massachusetts. Accordingly, this letter is submitted for your careful consideration in the review;of the Petitioner's anticipated application to proceed with changes to the existing nonconforming property and use. As homeowners at 22 Andrew Street and neighbors of the subject property, we strenuously object to the approval of.any Building Permits, Variances or Special Permits that the Petitioner may request to construct a:2-unit,residentiaLbuilding:at,7,8A Webb Street in Salem., We,request,that.you deny any Building Permit;Application:which mould constitute`a change in use or.which would enlarge`or`alter the existing structure in� way: which;"increases_i[s nonebnformrty.; and we,regnest you.notify a J Mr. Thomas St. Pierre, Inspector of Buildings & Zoning Enforcement Officer City of Salem 17 March 2003 Page 2 the Petitioner that he must return to the Board of Appeals for approval of applicable Variances and Special Permits as stipulated by the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance, based on the following provisions of the Ordinance: 1. Permitted Uses, R-2 District (Sec. 5-2): The existing structure located on the property is a "Private Garage" which is only permitted in R-2 two-family residential districts as an accessory use when it is "clearly incidental to the principal use." 2. Article VIII - Nonconformity (Sec. 8-1 Intent): The intent of the Zoning Ordinance adopted in 1965 was to allow the continuation of nonconforming buildings and uses which existing prior to the adoption of the Ordinance and to require approval of Special Permits or Variances when enlargement or alteration of a nonconforming structure or use is proposed (as provided in Section 9-4). The land and 3-car private garage structure located at 78A Webb Street was initially subdivided from the 2-family residence at 78 Webb Street by the owners Richard S. and Gertrude C. Martin on 1 October 1963. Ownership of 78 Webb Street was transferred to Robert M. and Kathleen H. Martin for less than $100, while ownership of 78A Webb Street was retained by Richard S. and Gertrude C. Martin. While the 2-family residence at 78 Webb Street transferred ownership five times between 1963 and 1985, the 3-car garage located at 78A Webb Street remained in the Martin family until 1972 when it was sold to Robert P. McNeill. McNeill later sold the garage to James Shea d/b/a Professional Roofing on 8 March 1983. The above has been confirmed by review of Registry of Deeds records. In addition, the first record of 78A Webb Street in the Polk Salem City Directory occurs in 1971. No business name or business use is identified. The property is identified for the first time as being a separate and distinct lot from the adjacent 78 Webb Street. In conclusion, since the private garage is not incidental to a residential use that currently exists or previously existed at the time of amnesty or the "grandfathering" of all pre- existing nonconforming uses and structures in 1965, the current private garage building and use is a "Nonconformity" as defined by Article VIII of the Zoning Ordinance, and as such, any proposed changes after 1965 to said nonconforming structure requires Zoning Board of Appeals approval. 3. Nonconforming Lot (Sec. 8-2): With only 1194 square feet in area, the lot is substantially below the minimum 5000 square feet of area required by the Zoning Ordinance. In addition, with only 28 feet of lot frontage, the lot is far below the minimum 50 feet of frontage required by the Ordinance. Subparagraph (1) of Section 8-2 stipulates that lots which could not otherwise be built upon for residential purposes under the terms of the Ordinance by reason of restricted lot area or lot width, may be used for one or two-family residential use if it meets the following provisions: • at the time of recording or endorsement of the Ordinance (1965), the lot was not held in common ownership with any adjoining land; and a Mr. Thomas St. Pierre, Inspector of Buildings & Zoning Enforcement Officer City of Salem 17 March 2003 Page 3 • the lot conformed to then-existing requirements; and • the lot has at least 5000 square feet of lot area and 50 feet of frontage. In conclusion, the subject property does not meet the stipulated provisions of Section 8-2 and is therefore not a buildable lot for residential purposes. The existing lot, building and use remain nonconforming, and therefore any proposed change to the existing nonconforming building or use must comply with the current Zoning Ordinance. 4. Nonconforming Use of Land (Sec. 8-3): Although no longer permissible under the present Zoning Ordinance, the existing use may be continued so long as it remains otherwise lawful, and is not "enlarged, increased or extended to occupy a greater area of land than was occupied in 1965. 5. Nonconforming Structure (Sec. 8-4): A pre-existing structure which could not otherwise be built under the terms of the Ordinance by reasons of restrictions on area, lot coverage, height, yard dimensions, location on the lot, etc., may be continued so long as it remains otherwise lawful, and is not enlarged or altered in any way which increases its nonconformity or which increases its height except as provided for in Section 8-6. 6. Nonconforming Use of Structure (Sec. 8-5): As neighbors on Andrew Street, we have been concerned for years that the structure is unlawfully being used for "storage of building supplies" which is not allowed in an R-2 District under the terms of the Ordinance. Such use of a structure is only permitted in B-4 and I Districts. The use of a pre-existing nonconforming structure may be continued so long as it remains otherwise lawful, and: • the structure is not enlarged, extended, constructed, reconstructed, moved or structurally altered, except when changing the use to a use which is permitted in the district; and • if no structural alterations are made, the nonconforming use of the structure may be changed to another nonconforming use, provided that the Board of Appeals finds that the proposed use is equally or more appropriate to the district than the existing nonconforming use; and • if the nonconforming use is superseded by a permitted use, the structure must conform to the regulations for the district, and the nonconforming use may not be resumed; and • if the nonconforming use is abandoned or not used for a period of 2 years, the nonconforming use and structure shall lose whatever rights might otherwise exist to its continuation. However, the current use as "storage of building supplies" is not grandfathered because it did not exist at time of passage of the Zoning Ordinance in 1965. In conclusion, we still contend that the use of the building and lot for anything other than storage A h. I Mr. Thomas St. Pierre, Inspector of Buildings & Zoning Enforcement Officer City of Salem 17 March 2003 Page 4 appropriate to a residential use is not permitted by the Ordinance and therefore the current use by Professional Roofing for "storage of building supplies" is unlawful. As was originally brought to the attention of the Inspector of Buildings in May of 1993, we again request that a "cease and desist" order be issued to the owner of the subject property if, following your inspection of said premises, it is determined that the building is being used illegally. 7. Board of Appeals - Granting Special Permits (Sections 8-6 and 9-4): The Board of Appeals may grant a Special Permit for a change to another nonconforming use or for its alteration or enlargement, provided that the Board finds that the use as changed, altered or extended will not depart from the intent of the Ordinance and its prior use or degree of use, and provided that the building or use is neither increased in volume nor area unreasonably. In conclusion, first, we do not believe that the any proposed change of use, alteration or enlargement of the subject property shall be approved or authorized except by granting of Special Permits and/or Variances by the Zoning Board of Appeals as stipulated in the Zoning Ordinance. Second, with regard to any future application by the owner of 78A Webb Street to the Zoning Board of Appeals for approval to change the nonconforming structure and use to a conforming residential use, we contend that the owner will not be able to demonstrate that any hardships exist which would satisfy the requirements of Section 9-5 of the Ordinance. Therefore, since the granting of Special Permits and/or Variances for the subject Petition would incur substantial detriment to the public good and would nullify the intent of the district and the purpose of the Zoning Ordinance, we will continue to speak out in opposition to the subject Petition or any similar Petition to the Zoning Board of Appeals, and we will request that the Board of Appeals deny any request for Variances or Special Permits. Thank you for your support and your commitment to adhering to the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. If you have any questions or comments concerning the points raised in this letter, please do not hesitate to contact us. Respectfully, aniel 7Pierc J. Tracy Pierce ! copy: Mayor Stanley J. Usovicz, Jr. Regina Flynn, Councillor Ward Two John Keenan Esquire, City Solicitor ClIC rOF �SAL.EIA, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CIF T OF SAILEMI MA SALEM, MA 01 970 CLERK'S OFFICE s9� a TEL. (978) 745.9595 - FAX (978) 740.9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR 1003 FEB 20 P 3: 13 DECISION OF THE PETITION OFJAMES SHEA REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 78A WEBB STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held February 19, 2003 meeting with the following Board Members were present: Nina Cohen Chairman, Stephen Harris, Nicholas Helides, Richard Dionne and Joan Boudreau.. 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. At the request of the petitioner's Attorney Stephen Lovely, the Salem Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant leave to withdraw this petition without prejudice requesting a Variance from minimum lot area, minimum lot area per dwelling, lot coverage and number of stories to allow a 2 unit building for the property located at 78A Webb Street located in a R-2 zone. GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE. FEBRUARY 19 2003 - J 00-1� Nina Cohen, Chairman Board of Appeal A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK Appeal from this decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of the 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 of �ajem, fflassar4useffs R ?_ Pourb of �Fpeal DECISION ON THE PETITION OF JAMES W. SHEA FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR 78A WEBB ST. , SALEM A hearing on this petition was held on December 5, 1984 with the following' Board Members present: James Hacker, Chairman; Messrs. , Charn%sj uzinski .and Associate Member Bencal. 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 4OA. Petitioner, owner of the premises, requests a Special Permit to allow him to extend the nonconforming use of the premises as a roofing business into a proposed second story addition. The premises is in an R-2 district. The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to this request for a Special Permit is Section V B 10, which provides as follows: Nctwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing in this Ordinance, the Board of Appeal may, in accordance with the procedure and conditions set forth in Section VIII F and IX D, grant Special Permits for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming structures, and for changes, enlargement,, extension or -. erzansion of nonconforming lots, land,-structux ' and uses, provided, however, that such change;"ex eris on 1 enlargement or expansion shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to the neighborhood. In more general terms, this Board is, when reviewing Special Permit requests, guided by the rule that a Special Permit request may be granted upon a finding . by the Board that the grant of the Special Permit will promote the public health, ,_.safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants. The Board of Appeal, after hearing the evidence and viewing the plans at the hearing, makes the following findings of fact: 1 . Petitioner has agreed to alter his petition such that no flammables will be stored in the proposed addition; 2. The proposed addition will be used for administrative offices; 3. The risk of fire at the premises will not be increased by creating the proposed addition. 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 . The proposed addition and it's use in petitioner's roofing business will not be substantially more detrimental than the existing noncon- formity tot he neighborhood or to the public good; DECISION ON THE PETITION OF JAI•SES W. SHEA FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR 78A WEBB ST. , SALEM page two r 2. The proposed addition does not derogate from the intent or purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 4 to 0 to grant the Special Permit requested by petitioner, provided that: 1 . No fla'nmables be stored in the proposed addition; 2. All state, federal and local codes, ordinances, laws and ' j regulations regarding flanmables generally and liquid propane specifically be adhered to; 3. A.C. hardwired smoke detectors be installed pursuant to applicable regulations; — - a 4. A Certificate of Occupancy be obtained. SPECIAL PERMIT GRANTED Scott E. Charnas, Secretary A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE. CITY CLERK i t i i i APPEAL FRD'! TWS DMSI.'N. IF A';'i. SHUL 9E V,',^.E PURSU!'!TJO SE 11DS 17 OF THE MESS. 6 E:i b, S:51 A'; Sr.. _ SE P-EDr.!:; 2'C DAYS Ali ER THE DATE OF FILING CF l :-; 1': THE C .'. iH QTY CLERK. I . _ :v _. �: _._. -_i i 11. is I:', T:i= .,i:B,H ESSD: R-'.i!i P�f, .._:.S ..';D IiCEx ED u':2E2 THE icA:-.:E OF iii[ G''Sif r. T' OF RECORD OR IS RECORDED Ai;D ACTED GN THE ONNER'S CERTIFICATE CF TITLE. L 1 BOARD OF APPEAL u .-- C L f, i C n - C 2 U h I 11 r IIfttlPm, C2ISS2StIj1I�PttS 1 �uttra rrf �upeal MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF APPEAL - DECEMBER 5, 1984 A Public Hearing of the Salem Board of Appeal was held Wednesday, December 5, 1984 at 7:00 p.m. , on the second floor of One Salem Green. Notice of said hearing was sent to abutters and other interested persons. Notices of the hearing having been duly advertised in the Salem Evening News on November 21 , 28, 1984. Members present: Messrs. , Hacker, Charnas, Luzinski and Associate Member Bencal Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by the Chairman, James Hacker. Mr. Bencal was appointed a voting member. Mr. Luzinski made a motion to accept the minutes of the June 20, October 17 & 24th meeting. Mr. Charnas seconded. MINUTES UNANIMOUSLY ACCEPTED Mr. Charnas read a letter from Gary Moore, Manager of Winter Island, requesting the Board allow them to withdraw their petition without prejudice. The Board unanimously allow them to withdraw. Mr. Hacker announced to the assemblage that the petition for 16 Ord St. would not be heard. A vote to allow withdrawal was not needed as this was never advertised but did appear on the original agenda. Mr. Hacker explained to all present that as there was only a four man Board it would take a unanimous vote for any petitions to be granted. Anyone wishing to withdraw may do so at this time. No one withdrew. 78A Webb St. - James W. Shea Petitioner is requesting a Special Permit to extend an existing nonconforming use into the proposed second story addition in this R-2 district. Mr. Charnas read the application and a letter from Councillor Stephen Lovely, Ward III, in favor, also a letter from Norman LaPointe. Fire Inspector, stating the fire department has no objection but strongly recommends firm stipulations for the operation of this business in this particular area as it involves storage of liquid propane gas. Attorney John Tierney, represented the petitioner. This building is familiar to all, it is a building that was a considerable blight, it was run down and in disrepair. Since Mr. Shea. purchased it, he has done many renovations. It is used for storage, would like the addition for more storage and for office space. Att. Tierney submitted pictures of the property, before and after. This will be very much the same degree of use. There are other businesses in the area. This business is the least active as far as traffic is concerned. Will not derogate for the intent of the Ordinance. He submitted a petition in favor signed by twelve abutters. This will only add storage and offices, will not exacerbate traffic. Mr. Luzinski asked how long he has been in business. Since 1983, it has been, in fact, a separate lot since 1914. Mr. Charnas asked the Fire Inspector if there is any problem with that area with this business. Mr. LaPointe said no. Speaking in favor: Councillor McCabe, Ward 6, Frank Page, 28 Webb St. Speaking in opposition: Joseph Collins, 78 Webb St. , this property once belonged to us, this has no land at all, he has tar paper there which is flammable. The roof and down spout is on my property. He parks trucks in the street and sometimes leaves it overnight and weekends. Thomas Collins, 78 Webb St. , is the frame of the addition going to be wood? Yes. My main concern is the storing of flammable material, concerned about fire. iLIHOTES - DECEMBER 5, 1984 .,• _.. page two 78.4 ;,!ebb St. - Continued The houses are not too far apart, with this addition, the hazard is greatly increased. In Rebuttal: Attorney Tierney: This will comply with the fire code, I am not an expert on toxicity, but I am sure Mr. Shea is familiar with the materials used and the codes. Mr. Luzinski asked about the dumpster. Doesn' t belong to Mr. Shea. Mr. Bencal asked what kind of materials are being stored. Mr. Shea answered: Tar, sheet metal,a sphalt. Tar paper doesn' t burn as fast as regular paper. Nothing is heated on the property, it is done on the job. Mr. Bencal: Hoffa many trucks? Mr. Shea: three, usually 'bring then; home. Fire Inspector LaPointe: as far as the storage of propane gas, we would determine the area where it would be kept. Control would be firm. Mr. Bencal: asked Pir. LaPointe if they would need A.C. °hard::ired detectors. Mr. LaPointe. Yes fir. Luzinski: How much gas do you store? Mr. Shea: 400 gallon cans and fill them when we go to the job. Mr. Bencal : Do you meet any clients there? No. Hearing closed. Mr. Bencal: I think the fact that they have addressed some of the concers I had as well as the neighbors and the fact that the gentleman has taken a blighted area, indicates his willingness to work with the city and E improve the area. He should be able to continue and I would be in favor as 1 long as he complies with the fire department. Mr. Charnas: always glad when businesses Uo well. They have tried to meet the concerns of the neighborhood. Have a problem with a business in an R-2 area that deals with flammables and to allow the expansion of this. There are dwelling units within 20 feet of this. I am opposed, I thin}; the petitioner will do all he can to control this but I am: still opposed. Mr. Hacker: agrees somewhat, thinks this addition is marginal. Petitioner seems to be conscientious, gives something back to the community. - If he were to leave, he would expand somewhere else. We have heard no vigorous opposition, this would be an opportunity to limit the risks. He asked Mr. Shea how many are employed there. Mr. Shea: five and would continue to be five, this is just storage and office, will not store more flammables than is already there, just want more room. Mr. Charnas: I would vote for this if it was just office and no storage of flammables in this addition. Att. Tierney: Mr. Shea has no problem with no storage in the addition, nothing will be stored upstairs, no flammables. Mr. Hacker: If we were to grant this, we could word the decision so that nothing flammable would be stored up there. Mr. Charnas What is the enforcability of this. Inspector LaPointe: No problem at all. Mr. Charnas made a motion to grant the Special Permit to extend nonconforming use into the proposed second story addition as more fully described on plans submitted to the Board on condition: No flammables be stored in the addition, all state, federal, and local codes, ordinances, laws and regulations regarding flammables generally and liquid propane specifically be adhered to, A.C. 'nard:aired smoke detectors be installed, a Certificate of Occupancy be obtained. Mr. Bencal seconded. UN.; ',IMOUSLY GRANTED 1L Forrester St. - Clark & Patricia Finniss Petitioners are requesting a Variance and/or Special Permit to convert an existing two family dwelling into a two unit condominium in this R-2 district. 1`r. Charnas read the application and a letter from the Fire Inspector stating the Fire Dept. had no objections. Attorney Robert Munroe, 81 Washington St. , represented the petitioners. He stated this is presently an owner occupied, 2 family dwelling, they simply want to convert to two unit condominium. They have owned this property for about 3 years. have made many improvements, there will I e no exterior changes. No one appeared in favor or in opposition, hearing " closed. h1r. Charnas: is the second unit vacant? Att. Munroe: yes, they bought it vacant. Mr. Luzinski: noticed you have been working on Sundays, are you awarerthere is an ordinance against that? Mr. Finniss: no, thought as long as it was my house it would be all right. Mr. Hacker: How many parking spaces? Three. Mr. Hacker: I have no problem as long as the three spaces are 17 Andrew Street Salem, MA 98'7 REP N 4 16 PH '87 William H. Munroe Zoning Enforcement offic4-a AFI`ED Building Department CITY OF SALEH, HESS, City of Salem Salem, Massachusetts R�:�8'A—Webb Street Dear Mr. Munroe: Please consider this letter a formal request that you enforce the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Salem concerning the use of the property at 78A Webb Street, owned by James Shea and occupied by Professional Roofing. At the present time there is no Certificate of Occupancy , on record in the Building Department in violation of Sections X-A and X-B of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Salem. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Sincerely, � �yt2 cx� 1 r� 35 Cet-�— �@r(' . OFl�b,cca'nrA'4i . . .. . Wi645J V.b afeni, � ' mi5ac4uBetts 4 a '9 Public Vropertg Department i0itilbing Pepttrtntent (One *alvni (Mrcen .. 71�-11213 William H. Munroe Director of Public Property Maurice M. Martineau, Ass't Inspector Inspector of Buildings Edgar J. Paquin, Ass't Inspector Zoning Enforcement Officer John L. LeClerc, Plumbing/Gas Insp. September 22, 1987 Kevin R. Harvey Ward Two Councillor 35 Andrew Street Salem, MA 01970 RE—78A Webb—Street- � Dear Councillor Harvey: As you are aware the matter of 78A Webb Street is presently in the Court, in addition, Massachusetts General Law, specifically, 780 CMR, Section 119.3, states that, the request for a Certificate of Use and Occupancy must come from the owner of the property. It is the opinion of both this office and the City Solicitor that this matter must be resolved by the Court. Sincerely, .�� 001 William H. Munroe Zoning Enforcement Officer WHM:bms CC: Mary Jane & Gary Sturgwalt Ann & Michael Pelletier Thomas & Laurie Collins City Solicitor Enclosure: (1 ) 17 Andrew Street Salem, MA 'j William H . Munroe Zoning Enforcement Cfiicr Buildi-ng Department L11 it City of Salem Salem , I'lassachusetts RE : 78A Webb Street Dear Mr . Munroe : Please consider this letter a formal request that you enforce the zoning ordinance of the City of Salem concerning the use of the property at 78A Webb Street, owned by James Shea and occupied by Professional Roofing. At the present time there is no Certificate of occupancy on record in the Building Department in violation of Sections X-A and X-B of the Zoning ordinance of the City of Salem. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Sincerely, 12 X 5 C14", Agl ,� -7 �q- r 114 vt_ w �y.caaner4 a• a MICHAEL E. O'BRIEN CITY SOLICITOR "+� LEONARD 93 WASHINGTON STREET Jep�anc mt"`7 ASSISTANT CITY SF. OLICITOR 93 WASHINGTON STREET and and 81 WASHINGTON STREET CITY OF SALEM ONE BROADWAY SALEM, MA 01970 MASSACHUSETTS BEVERLY, MA01915 745.4311 745.4311 744.3383 921.1990 Please Reply to 81 Washington Street Please Reply to One Broadway May 28 , 1987 �o z x.,m r - William H. Munroe - 2 - May 29 , 1987 I can only assume that Mr. McIntosh was unaware of the issues raised by the appeal when he drafted his February 19 , 1985 letter. In any event, at this juncture it it the court and not your office which will ultimately decide this matter. Ve'ry­-!'ruly yours, _- chael E. O' Brien City Solicitor MEO/jp cc: City Clerk Councillor Harvey ` OYyµ.coBogAy F, a �Huf7li� �ru}rErt� �e�J�r#meat s qep, �F,�;�s �(� uiflittc� �epzrrtment 011e �ailnu (green 7.15-0213 William H. Munroe Director of Public Property Maurice M. Martineau, Asst Inspector Inspector of Buildings Edgar J. Paquin, Asst Inspector Zoning Enforcement Officer John L. LeClerc, Plumbing/Gas Insp. May 14, 1987 Mr. Michael E. O'Brien, Esquire City Solicitor City Hall 93 Washington Street Salem,MA 01970 RE: 78A Webb_Street a Dear Mike, Councillor Harvey has provided me with the attached copy of a letter from former Building Inspector McIntosh regarding property located at 78A Webb Street. The letter dated February 19, 1985, came after the Zoning Board of Appeal hearing, (December 5, 1984) and after the Appeal -of the Z.B.A. Decision, (January 4, 1985) . As Legal action was already in place at the time of the writing of the letter, I have no idea what Inspector McIntosh's intentions were, nor am I aware of the "Affidavits" referred to in the letter. There are several letters on file in this office, but they differ in what the prior use of the property has been over the years. I would appreciate your opinion as to what standing if any, this letter has at this point in this matter. Respectfully, William H. Munroe Inspector of Buildings WHM/eaf C.C. Councillor Harvey Attachment: Letter dated Feb. 19, 1985 �.Cow�,� Ctu of ttlent, 'fflizssar4use##s s a ]Jublic 13ropertV jDeparttnent T r ��pp rAea�HMg po?�Sv �llll?lnlg JP epMrtnierit Richarb X. fflc3ntas4 One Snlem preen February 19,1985 745-0213 James Shea D/B/A/ Professional Roofing Co. 78A Webb Street Re: Use of 78A Webb Street Salem,Ma 01970 Dear Mr. Shea: Affidavits on file in this office indicate that there is no legal non-conforming use for the above referenced property, other than the storage of cars. I am therefore requiring you to cease and desist from all of your illegal activities at the site at once. Failure on your part to comply with the above, will result in this matter being persued through the courts for its determination. Very truly yours, ;4t4ii4/ z�-l9q?_`�— Richard T. McIntosh Zoning Enforcement Officer RTM:mo' s cc: Michael Pelletier Stan Usovicz,Ward Councillor t y BOWES, HALLINAN, ATKiNs & PORTER ' ATTORNEYS AT LAW 301 LAFAYETTE STREET P.O. Box 987 ROBERT D.BOWES SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 DAVID J.HALLINAN GEORGE W.ATKINS.ID C.'�- ^'-1+- (617)741-1555 HENRY C.PORTER .85 JAr, J j i January 4, 1985 Mrs. Josephine R. Fusco Office of the City Clerk 93 Washington Street Salem, Massachusetts 01970 Re: 78A Webb Street Dear Mrs. Fusco: In accordance with Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A, Section 17, enclosed please find a copy of a Complaint filed this day with the Superior Court in Salem. Said Complaint constitutes an appeal from the decision of the Salem Board of Appeals granting a Special Permit for extension of an alleged nonconforming use of the above premises, which said decision was filed with your office on December 18, 1984. Very tru yo , avid J. ilinan cmd Enclosure CIO JM ES Foch' Q., COMMONWEALTH Q MASSACHUSETTS �.. TRI'AL':000RT , SUPERIOR COURT 'DEPARTMENT ESSEX, ss. NO. JOSEPH K. COLL'INS,.'HELEN COLLINS, MICMAL E: -PELLETIER ) ` and ANNE 'PELLETI'ER; ), Plaintiff's ) vs. , ).. COMPLAINT JAMES W'. SHEA and SCOTT CHARNAS, ) EDWARD LUZINSKI-,.,ARTHUR LABRECQUE, , YRICHARD•A. ;BE,NCAL , ,DOUGLAS HOPPER, .;') ,• JAMES B. HACKER and JOSEPH A-,. ) ' PIEMONTE, As They Are Members Of ) The Board Of. Appeal's Of The -City )' Of Salem, ) . . Defendants ) I . , The',Plaintiffs, reside at and'.a,re ,the owners of the real ' and personal property located at the. following• addre'sses in the City !of ,Salem, Coun't'y of Essex, Commonwealth of-Massachusetts: Joseph R. Collins - 78 Webb Street, Salem, MA Helen :Col'lins '- :78, Webb Street, Salem, MA Michael 'E.'- Pelletier- 35 Andrews Street, Sale[n,' MA Anne- Pei letier - 35', Andrews' Street, Salem, MA 2. The Defendant, James, W, Shea .("SHEA") is' the owner of a parcel of real estate located at 78A Webb Street, Salem, Massachusetts;. and the remaining named defendants are the members of the Board of Appeals of the City of, Salem ("BOARD OF APPEALS") whD reside at tier, 1`0,11owing addresses: Scott, Ch'ar.nas 16, 1-oring Avenue, Salem, : MA Edw,ard, Luzi:nski 25 Hardy Street, Salem, MA Arthur Labrecque 111 ,liazel Street, 'Salem, 'MA Richard A.. Bencal 19 Goodell ..Street, Salem, MA 2 Ooug;las.Hopper 15 Dearborn Street, Salem,; .MA James B: Hacker 7-UgP Road, Salam,, HA, 'Joseph M. Piemonte . 22' Crowdis Street,' Salem MA 3. Defendant SHEA filed with defendant BOARD OF APPEALS an application for Special Permit for extension ;of a noncon forming strgctore ,and' use of the premises at. 78A 1,febb Street, to allow for, the, addition of' a. second story and the use of the , premises as a, roofing business: 4.. " Defendant BOARD OF APPEALS granted -said. Special Permit by 'an undated decision. fIled with the Salem City Clerk ' on December, i$,' 11984 after public 'he arIng on December 5, 1984. , ' A.certified copy ,of said decision is annexed hereto as Appendix "An 5'. Theplaintiffs are ,persons aggrieved within the meaning of Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A, Section 17, by the decislon ,of the BOARDOF APPEALS granting sa.id, ,Speciai Permit to 'defendant SHEA. 6. The decision of defendant BOAR D• OF.APPEALS approving said Special ;Permit exceeds, its authority in Ehat at the time .of the application' use of the premises as a roofing business was a violation of the zoning ord'i'nance Isince said use was not a' nonconforming' bse .and no variance for said use or similar use had• ever been '•i sued: 7. The decision of defendant, BOARD •OF WpEALS :further exceeds its authority in that it is In violation .of .Settion IX D of the Salem,`Zgn,ing Ordinance whi.ch,;prohibits 'the 'grant of a Speci6i Permit where use of.the„Ian d or s'trutture. is specifically ,excluded from ,the district. 8. The',d'ecision of de;fendant ,BOARD gF ;APPEALS further exceeds,its' authority in that 'it is 'in violation of Section VIII C of the Salem Zoning Ordinance whaah' requires' mi:n,imum.off street 'parking requiremehts for allowed 'uses. 9. The decision .of defendani' BOARD OF APPEALS further exceeds, its authority in that''if. the' use of the structure and land at the. t.im6 of applicati,on,consisted of..a nonconforming use, then the extension of said Use departs frgm the 'intent of the Salem 'Zoning ,Ordinance and its pri'or ,use, and, degree of use; and the increase in volume and use is unreasonable. ` .' 10. The decision of defendant, BOARD 'OF :APPEALS further exceeds its authority in that the Special Permit, results in a substantial: detriment to the public 'good and '.is not in harmony with .the intent 'and purpose of the Salem'Zoning Ordinance. WHEREFORE, the plaintiffs request that the decision of the Salem. Bpard of Appeals 'granting said-SpecLal Permit to defendant SHEA' be annulled and for such ,other relief as may be equitable and proper. Dated.' January 4 , 1985 JOSEPH R. COLLINS, .HELEN COLLINS,', MICHAEL E. 'PELLETIER and ANNE PELLET. IER By their attorneys, , BOWES; HALLINAN, ATKINS E PORTER DAVID J:. HALLINAN 301 .Lafayette' Street P.O. 'Box 987 Salem, Mas'sachu'setts 01970 (b1'7). 741-1555 fit of ttlem, ttssttc us a#ts w:J � ' �uxrit of.c�.i�?�•' DECISION ON. THE,PE71TION O€ JAMES W. SkA FO$ ,A SPECIAL.;PERMIT FOR 78A WEBB S.T6' 'SALEM A hearing on this'petitiori was .held on December 5,• 1984 with the following Board Members present: James 'Hacker, Chairman; ,Messrs., CharnArs;Luzinski and Associate Member Bencal. Notice of the hearing was sent to'Abutters and-others and notices of the hearing were, properly published..in the Salem:Evening'iNews in accordance with Massachusetts General .Laws Chapter,40A., Petitioner, owner 'of the'premises, requests :a, special;' Permit to allow him to .extend the,nonconforming use of the premise's as a`roofing business into a proposed second storq addition., Tie premises' iS .in an R-2 ,dictrict. The provision of the Salem Zoning.Ordinance which is, appii9able 'to this request for a Special Permit is Section V B 10, which 'provides as ;follows: Notwithstanding anything to the oontrary:,appearine' in this Ordinance,' the Board of,. Appeal 'may, .in, accordance with the,,procedure and, conditions 'pet forth in SectiontVIII F .-and I$ D, •grant Special Permits for alterations acid reconstruction of nonconforming structures, and for. change's„ enlargement, extension or expansion of nonconforming lots, land',, structures,, . ; and uses.; provided; however, .that such change, extension, enlargement or 'expansion shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming us' , to the neighborhood. In more general terms, -this Board is, when reviewing Special Permit requests, guided by the rule that a 'Special Permit request may be granted upon a finding by the Board ' that the grant of the, Special Permit .will 'promote the public health, safety, convenience and.welfare of the 'City's, inhabitants. The Board of Appeal,' after hearing the evidence and viewing the p4ans at the hearing, makes the•following findings of fact: 1 . Petitioner .has agreed to alter his petition such' that no flammables will be stored in the proposed addition; 2. The prop'osed. addition .will, be used for• administrative offices; 3. The risk •of fire at the premises will not be, increased,by creating the proposed addition: 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 . The proposed. addition and `it!s use in' petitioner!s. roofing'business will not be' substantially more' detrimental:thsn' Ifhe. existing noncon- formity to,t he neighborhood or 'to' the public good;. ' '• DECISION ON THE PETITION •OF JAMES W,-SHEA FOR A="SPECIAL PERMIT FO$ .,'TBA'WEBB ST'., SALEM Page;.two 2. The oposed addition does.not -derogate•from. the intent .or purpose of th'e: Zoning Ordinance,. Therefore, the.,Zoning;Board of Appeal voted" 4 !to'O to. grant,the Special Permit requested by`,petitiohef, provided that: 1: ,No flammables •be stored in 'the pr oposed' addition,; ' 2. All' state, •,federal and local codes, :ordinances,'' laws and regulations regarding' flammables generally and',liquid•, prop.ane _ specifically be:,adhered "to;'. 3. A.C. hardwired.'smoke. detectors be installed pursuant to 'applicable regulations; ' 4. 'A Certificate"of' Occupancy' be obtained: ' SPECIAL PERMIT GRANTED . Scott E.',Charnas', Secretary A COPY OF THIS'DECISION IAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING`'BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK UPEAL. FPO'!"TH,.",'DENSMN, IF A.:1'. SHALL BE 6ME PI}P,St3A"II TO'SECTION 47 OF THE R;RSS. _ LA.ES. ,.�ih? $LU, A";'1 SFl%�L. S£ F'.rb YG"H": 2" DAYS 'AFTE' THE,DVE-OF FILII"5 . GF 13.2' I:_-X_'1:4 1".,+tea Orap' .: TH° MY GC.n� Rca7L •i Ta£ ".,J.H ooSY, S .h?( JE^ T,4OF HE CGCE4 ti OF RECORD:OR 3S$EGOROE6 AivD NOTES Gi'i 7}i£ G1tt6E?'6 CWINGATE•OF TITLE. _ BOARR OF APPEAL A Th.UE COPY AT#SSr JO HINS R'. . cor: 5 aft,CLBBIE 1 3-3T :4 1-3 IT, �7 411 Q 0, C ----j L 7! IJ '71 sr; k, c C: tz rl -3 rf t "if ul fill s 37L fil W iv -11 ON Ic. fjA 7-1 ij 71 C n a C Ml In .f 0 al 7C, z W, ,Q fit i.f W it M; ill J Fla tj aw 5 Columbus Square. Salem, MR 01970 December 26, 1984 Mr. Richard McIntosh Building InsPector Cits of Salem Salem, Massachusetts Dear Mr McIntosK First, let me give You some of my background. I bought the house at 20 Andrew Street in 1946 and lived there with my family until 1960 when I bought another residence at 12 Pickman Street ( the next street to Andrew Street ). In addition, from 1954 until 1976 1 owned an aPartment house at 25/27 Andrew Street. Also, I have drive-n down Webb Street many times a day in traveling to and from my home in the Salem Willows since I moved here in 1966. Thus I have a very good idea of the history of the neighborhood including 78A Webb Street over the Period of the last 58 wears. A Mr. Nan91.e owned both the house at 78 Webb Street and the S;1 at 78A Webb. The garages were onto rented to neighbors for storing cars--nei9hbors such as DePuty Chief Collins of the Salem Fire DePartment who lived at 18 Andrew Street during and after the war and rented one of the garages for his car because there was no room on his ProPerty at 18 Andrew to keeP his automobile. In fact, until the m1d-1950" s when PeoPle started to Pave their side Yards, the few garages like the four at ?@R Webb Street, the two at 21 Andrew Street and the three an Milk Street were all in great demand during the winter. I Personally rented garages at the latter two 25locations Prior to my Purchasing the ProPertq at /27Andrew Street which had a three-car garage, I never knew angthin9 excePt cars to be kePt in the garages at 78R Webb Street until about 3 Year . ago when an insulation comPany rented the garages and began storing insulation there. More recently , I noticed that Professional Roofing has afixed a sign to the garage and evidently begun oPeratin9 a business there. Sincerely sours, C' William E. Pelletier f I 1E P 11 Fit)T a v; rs cr kc -M.- U. F :Et DEC 28 1 42 m Z7 RECEIVED f f 7- CITY OF SALEM, MASS. in 77. ln Cr re, 7 0 ki'l 01 1f; ci- fli w 7 ffi r! a Iii kes -7 M 77 i7 17 'WL w R- U- --K ri si) cu T-j iT. j7., 7 0 ff! a i7r :7..- k !aJ Ct- VE I— ff? -1D i'LkILPIN-o OCIT 25 Andrew Street FES 14 2 ss PH AS Salem, MR 0190_1 RI CEWED Februars 14, 1983 Mr. Richard McIntosh CITY OF SALEM,MA5S. Building InsPector Cits of Salem Salem, Massachusetts Dear Mr McIntosh, In a letter dated December 20, 1984 ( coPq attached ) I formalls requested that 9ou investigate the oPeration of a business known Professional Roofing located in a four-car garage at 78R Webb Street. As met tau have not rePlied to m; request, Your failure to resPond is in marked contradiction to the statements gou made to me during our face-ta-face meeting on or about December 20, 1984 ( attended also bg Jane Stirgwolt and NO Planner Gerry Kavanaugh ). During that. meeting sou stated that "N law" tau were duts-bound to rePls within 14 dams to a formal recast like the one I was about to make of gou. You also stated that a search of tour records showed no evidence of an.-:' variance either requested or granted for the ProPerts at 78R Webb Street after the original request to build the garages in 1927. You then went, on to Proclaim that if I could obtain evidence that the use of the garages for a business was of recent origin, sou would move to evial.-, Professional Roofing from the Premises because it was an illegal use Q that ProPertq . Within two weeks of oar meeting I obtained affadavits concerning the historical use of 78A Webb Street and hard carried them to sour. office. I understand Mr Collins did the same. If tau cannot locate these aft adavits) I would be h7.PP9 to obtain caRies for 'a(,-u. I think I have been more that Patient: giving gou an extra six weeks within which to act. However, I and ms neighbors would like to see a more sPeeds resolution of this matter and I am asking vou to act in accordance with sour stated oPinion and use sour Power to shut this illegal business down and restore the use of 7OR Webb Street to its original and long-standing one of 9arag7.ng residents' automobiles. Michael E. Pelletier 25 Andrew Street Salem, MR 0190-.1 December 20; 1984 Mr. Richard McIntosh Building InsPector C09 of Salem Salem, Massachusetts Dear Mr McIntosh, Please consider this letter a formal request thatgoi.), investigate the oPeration of a business known as Professional Roofing locKed in a four-car garage at 78A Webb Street. This ProPerts is located in the middle of a residentialls zoned neighborhood and I am curious as to whether theg or angone else has ever gone before the Board of APPeals for Permission to oPerate a business at this location. It is mg understanding that Professional Roofing has o0_1 been oPerating at 78A Webb Street since mid-1982 when the: Purchased the garage from a Mr. McNeil . Prior to that time, the garage had been rented bw and used to store insulation for Ener99-Wise for about a gear and a half. In addition; I believe that Previous to its use Ot Evern-Wise, Mr McNeil ' s mother had used the 9ara9e to save some old Potterg molds from the ceramic studio she maintained at the corner of., Webb Street and Fort Avenue. Howeveri in the sixteen wears I have lived at this address, I cannot recall that there was ever a Potter:.' business at 78A Webb Street, Sincerelv tours, Michael E. Pelletier / 81 Webb Street Salem, MA 01970 December 31 , 1984 Mr" Richard MacIntosh Building Inspector City of Salem Salem, MA 01970 Sir : I have lived on Webb Street since 1929. I lived at 125 Webb Street until 1959, and then moved to 81 Webb Street and continue to live there now. Having been in the neighborhood for over fifty-five yearsv I have a good recollection of the garage located at 79A Webb Street" Mr. Nangle owned the garage as part of 78 Hebb Street property until ' somewhere around 1963" It was used solely as a garage" ` Between 1963 and 1967 approximately, the property at 78 Webb Street, including the garage was sold twice, once to Mr" Martin and then to Mr" Ruest. Again the garage was used only as a garage" In 1967 approximately, the garage was sold separately from the house to Landry Upholstery, where it was used for storage. Landry sold the garage to Mr. McNeil who used it for storage for Ceramic Greenware. Mr. McNeil then rented the garage to Mr" Paul Rickard of Energgmise who also used it for storage" Mr. McNeil then sold the garage to its present owner, Mr. Shea" Unlike any of the previous occupants who used the garage as a secondary ^ storage area, Mr" Shea is using the garage as his primary business location, which has caused increased street traffic. He has also installed two propane bottles outside his building which are not secured by any fencing" I would like to be put .on record as against the expansion of 78A Webb Street. This is a residential neighborhood which does not need a two-story garage storing flammable roofing materials, endangering the neighborhood" Sincerely, Mrs" Phyllis Speliotis ' F5 Andrew Street DEC 33 Salem, OR 01970 December 201 198.1. RECEIVEO Mr. Richard McIntosh CITY OF SALEi`I,MAS$e Building InsPector Cits of Salem Salem, Massachusetts Dear Mr McIntosK Please consider this letter a formal request that gou• investigate the oPeration of a business known as Professional Roofin.Zt located in a four-car garage at 78A Webb Street. This ProPerts is located in the middle of a rendentialIg zoned neighborhood and I am curious as to whether them or ansone else has ever gone before the Board of APPeals for Permission to oPerate a business at this location. It is mg understanding` that Professional Rooting has onlq bee-it oPerating at 78A Webb Street since mid-1983 when then Purchased the garage from a Mr. McNeil . Prior to that time: the garage had been rented bg and used to store insulation for Ener9w-Wise for about I. near and a half. In addition, I believe that Previous to its use 0-1 EI , r9s-Wise, Mr McNeil " s mother had used the garage to save some old Potters molds from the ceramic studio she maintained at the corner of' Webb Street and Fort Rvenue. However, in the sixteen gears I have lived at this address, I cannot recall that there was ever a Potters business at 78A Webb Street. Sincerels sours, A4 za,97��t Michael E. Pelletier 25 Ry drew Street Slem, MR a 01970 DEC 20 1 33 PH '04 December 20, 1984 ED Mr. Richard McIntosh CITY OF SRECEIVALEM,MASS. BuildQ9 InsPector Cits of Salem Salem, Massachusetts Dear Mr McIntosh, This letter is to follow uP on our Phone conversation of Tuesdaq , December 18, 1984 and our conversation at :Jour" office on the same dam . Rs mou recall , I Phoned on December 18 to rePort that work wa,.-.. underwas on the garage located at 7GR Webb Street. You rePorted to me when I saw gov later that dam that the work in Progress was PreParatorm to adding the second storm addition, but not actualls the addition. That dam one or two courses of masonarg blocks were removed, Yesterdag , December 19, cement was PumPed into the walls N tIe: structure and todag , December 20, several courses of new cement blocks have been added to the toPs of the walls at 788 Webb Street. I know gou are keePN9 a close eve on the situation, but doe. , this amount of work still meet with gour wroval 'ie Sincerelq qours� # �.4� Michael E. Pelletier DEC1�J u }J [] �l xn v1 RECE|YEO 78 Webb Street CITY OF SALEM, MASS, Salemv MA 01970 December 17, 1984 Mr. Richard MacIntosh Building Inspector City of Salem, MA One Salem Green Salemv MA 01970 Sir: I mould like to have recorded on this date, December 17, 1984, the owner of the property at 78A Webb Street, Salem, MA has begun expansion work to the existing structure on the property. Having spoken with Margarite O' Shea of your office, she informed me the property owner does not have a permit to do such work as of this date. Please be advised of this situation. Respectfully, q4w (. 11A ~ ^-- Thomas P. Collins .� /~ � �p�� ./' _ ' 78 Webb uebb Street Salem, MA 01970 December 31 , 1984 Mr . Richard MacIntnsh Building Inspector City of Salem Salem, MA 01970 Dear Mr. MacIntosh : The following statements describe what we remember as the functional usages of the property at 78A Webb Street, Salem, MA. We began residing at 78 Webb Street in July of 1969" In the period spanning July, 1969 to the present, there have been four occupants at 78A Webb Street as best we can remember. 1 . ) Landry Brothers Upholstery used the garage for storage, and were rarely present" They used the property for secondary storage, 2^ > Ceramics Greenmare followed Landry Brothers and again used the garage for secondary storage. As with Landry Brothers, this was not their, ^ primary place of business and traffic in and out of the garage was minimal , and at times almost neglible" 3. ) The next occupant was Mr. Rickard, owner of Energgmise, a local insulation firm who remained there until Mr. Shea purchased the garage" � ~'~ � . 4^ } When Mr. Shea, Professional Ronfingv moved into 78A Hebb Street he used the property as his business address" Since this is his only location the traffic in the area, because of his trvcksv increased, Mr. Shea also installed two 100# propane bottles outside the garage, which remain not fenced in, and subject to vandalism. This fuel is a great concern, since if one were to explode, it Would cause great damage and injury, and potentially be fatal " This proposed usage is not suited for a residential area. Very truly yours, ly� Mr� Joieih Collins Mrs" H�&n Collins \ Mr, Thomas P. Collins Mrs. Laurie A. Collins i•c�"'�s..1t:�'S`;'�:ifP3ivvi #..a 5:�'fl. Y.r":.%`MR'1.i*s �* ..WrY.rs,+�Y �'?"3':✓-az stx`' L"`rnp,1` ''wF;'!? "r*r'43"�*,?lr.u' Ps;y94.,F'Flt'�PY4�.It `# $y�YYIWnY.j:YTB�'�1t'`"P'>�1..�.,.. DATE OF PERMIT PERMIT No. OWNER LOCATION James W. Shea it Webb ryC. :9 �5 , STRUCTURE MATERIAL DIMENSIONS No. OFSTORIES • •D COST .... 'til BUILDER proposed second story addition. No flammables to be stored in addition w T" BOARD OF APPEAL: 12/5/84 GRANTED Special Permit to extend nonconforming use into :y DATEOFPERMIT PERMIT NO. P �I4 (ht. r rS t ¢ OWNERLOCATION DWELLING MATERIAL DIMENSIONS NO.OFSTORIES FAMILIES WARD BUILDER COS� POCKET FOLDER OTHER SLOGS. MATERIAL DIMENSIONS NO.OF STORIES BUILDER PLAN NO.SHEETS 6/26/85 #437 , (Owner-Thomas Collins). Vinyl Siding t e i f h 3 . i i �tsitt ii kk' P 3s4fi )i. r sr� ����i, '&e,.u5 •.� r •` l s 'cai��` k E�e x � ����"' h x'� '���ts �; r�r a' ",r' Y "w 'k'�a � ° � '� � �p'�'-� @b M1� Il�v b• >� *�'^ 'fi a Yeah'�`?'� � r n`'�5y L '� t, r r r r { t4l � A� q4t r e�.^'1�r ,r n dI �-'9 hA .k As f":.tr'`" i ,?KY .tW Kx ate n. tb,��y w r i 1 r e �f •,� �•��'---a<=� ��ui(linq �e�ttr#nlent Qu of IY.,1L 1 t One ^�;nlrni (6rern 745-0213 William H. Munroe Director of Public Property Maurice M. Martineau, Asst Inspector } Inspector of Buildings Edgar J. Paquin, Ass't Inspector Zoning Enforcement Officer John L. LeClere, Plumbing/Gas Insp. t { March 26, 1987 c E Councillor Kevin R. Harvey City of Salem City Hall RE: 78A Webb Street # Dear Councillor Harvey: As per your request-1-have"reviewed-tEe &epartmenti files with - . -- .— regards to property located at 78A Webb St. , owned by Mr. James W. } Shea. tY f In view of the attached copy of the Special Permit granted by the C ` Board of Appeal to Mr. Shea regarding the use of the. property, and a recent inspection of the property by Fire Inspector LaPointe, it would appear that no violations exist at this time. Respectfully, William H. Munroe Inspector of Buildings WHM:bms n y Enclosure: (1 ) 4 I. p } f 4OUrordSt, - f.i E;n• 2' 5C) �J Gostoa,t.Sa_ LIFE&!aS61J.LIV (G 17)357-7000 - - - t Building Cosrra.ssioner or Board of Health or Inspector of B ildings AND Board of Selectmen r•� RE: Insured: ML4 ,m d DWS Property Address: 7 a' bVE l?13 ST� Policy 140. 6 BP .5-V3 .0- 79 Fc i4 Date of Loss, File or Claim bo. Claim has been made involving loss, damage or destruction of the above captioned ,rocert.v, vhich rrav either exceed U,000.00 or cause I:ass.Gcn_laxs , Ch, -,ter 11;3 . S .ction 6 to be applicable. If ary notice tinder I.ass.(;er..ltitrs, C1t., 9, Sec. 3B is appropriate, please direct it to the atte::tion of the writer and include a reference to the captioned insured, location, policy number, date of loss and claim or file tw:ioer. Signature f i i_tle .On this date, I caused copies of this notice to be sent to the persons named above at the addresses indicated above by first class mail. Signature u date :•� . . 'A '487•A ketna Life I:.surz.ncc Cort n3ny/The ,Ltna C(liuAv an-1 Sum!v r.....n ro BUILDING DEPT MASSACHUSETTS PROPERTY INSURANCE FAIR PLAN UNDERWRITING ASSOCIATION JOL 10 8 48 PH 191 Three Center Plaza Boston, Massachusetts 02108 CITY OFF SALEM, (617) 723-3800 LASS. Form of Notice of Casualty Loss to Building Under Mass. Gen. Laws, Ch. 139, Sec. 3B TO: Building Commissioner or Board of Health or Inspector of Buildings Board of Selectmen Building Department 1 Salem Green Salem, Massachusetts 01970 RE: Insured: Thomas and Laurie Collins Property Address: 78 Webb Street Salem,. Massachusetts Policy Number: 328268 Loss of April 21, 19 91 File or Claim Number(s) : 115550 Claim has been made involving loss, damage or destruction of the above- captioned property, which may either exceed $1,000. 00 or cause Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 143, Section 6 to be applicable. If any notice under Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 139, Section 3B is appropriate, please direct it to the attention of the writer and include a reference to the captioned insured, location, policy number, date of loss and claim or file number. (Signature) Title; Bruce M. Kusenda Supervising Claims Adjuster On this date, I caused copies of this notice to be sent to the person named above at the addresses indicated above by first class mail. Signature and date MUA-CL-21 (Rev. 11/80) Please refer to MUA Number in correspondence on MPI UA Risks Sp'dedV Letter. 44-982 Speed Letter / To From--�,�-d'.(� 17 Sublebt- _xc.c4wrwo � MESSAGE . r;. Date -,91 Signed REPLY / Date Signed WitsonJones GRAYLNE FORM 4-a 2 yPAHT RECIPIENT—RETAIN WHITE COPY, RETURN PINK CC HB83•POINTED IN USA 1184 SENDER—DEIACH AND RETAIN YELLOW COPY. SEND \:-. E AND PINS. COPIES tNi,IT CARE I�" INT: