Loading...
2002-ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS �e�,s,ors aoa a �oxmr CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEM, MA 1 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE IL� SALEM, MA 01970 �s TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. Z002 OCT 20 A la 50 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF LEONARD ILY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5 BARNES ROAD R-1 A hearing on this petition was held October 16, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Joan Boudreau, Stephen Harris, 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 for side yard setback to construct an accessory structure (garage) for the property located at 5 Barnes 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner, Leonard Ily seeks a variance from Section 7-8(1) of the Zoning Ordinance to construct a 40' by 40 'garage in which to store trailers and valuable racecars, which he uses for his hobby of car racing. 2. Currently, there is a one-story wood frame shed building on the lot that is visible from Highland Avenue and is considered to be an eyesore by the neighbors. Mr. Ily intends to tear down the existing shed and rebuild a roofed, wood frame garage on a concrete foundation that would house all his racing equipment, including trailers, racing cars and maintenance equipment. Mr. Ily specified that, although large, the planned structure would be designed to present a nice • appearance to Highland Avenue. DECISION OF THE PETITION OF LEONARD ILY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5 BARNES ROAD R-1 page two 3. Petitioner does not intend to commence any commercial activity in the proposed structure, indeed, petitioner understands that this site is not zoned for commercial activity. 4. Several neighbors, voiced support for the proposed structure as an alternative to viewing racing equipment on the lot. Such support was provided by Victor Frasca, George Flessas, Phil Kinder, Richard Thomas and Dennis Kolbert. Councillor at Large Kevin Harvey and Mary Perrone who was the seller of the property. 5. Candido Milani and Nina Clay were concerned about a series of piles of dirt and stone that petitioner bought onto the property. Mr. Ily agreed to remove the dirt piles as a condition of the granting of the variance. 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 5-0 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 requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 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 shall be clapboard and approved by the Building Commissioner. 6. A Certificate of Inspection shall be obtained. • 7. Petitioner shall obtain proper street numbering for the City of Salem Assessors Office and shall display said number so as to be visible from the street. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF LEONARD ILY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5 BARNES ROAD R-1 page three 8. No building permit will be issued until dirt piles are removed. 9. After completion, all vehicles related shall be stored inside structure. 10. Landscape shall be done on the side of the property located at Highland Avenue and Barnes Road. VARIANCE GRANTED OCTOBER 16, 2002 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 day 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 • CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS m3L BOARD OF APPEAL Cl i ,j, .r-a �`i, i,1A > 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 1001 JUL 18 P 3: 23 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JOHN RUSSELL REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 45 BARR STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held July 17, 2002 the following Board Members were present: Nina Cohen Chairman, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belair, 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 the Salem Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant leave to withdraw this petition without prejudice for Variance from rear setback, lot coverage and number of stories to construct an addition for the property located at 45 Barr Street located in a R-2 zone. �~ GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE JULY 17, 2002 /J� , �'�.� (� 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 eco CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS C/Ty BOARD OF APPEAL � Rjf fRK CQ 2 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR S Of Ch . SALEM, MA 01 970 f TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. MAYOR VICZ, JR. of 114 r -4 /0. 08 DECISION ON THE PETITION OF JAMES D'AMICO REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMITNARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 50 BARR STREET EXT R-2 A hearing on this petition was held on April 24, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, Stephen Harris, Nicholas Helides 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. Petitioner is requesting a Variance from height, number of stories and lot area per dwelling and a Special Permit to allow three dwelling units in an R-2 district for the property located at 50 Barr Street Ext. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing in this Ordinance, the Board of Appeal may, in accordance with the procedure and conditions set forth in Section 8-6 and 9-4, grant Special Permits for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming structures, and for changes, enlargement, extension or expansion of nonconforming lots, land structures, and used, provided, however, that such change, extension, 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 Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding of the Board that: a. Special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect the land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting the lands, buildings or structures in the same district. b. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner. c. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance. • CITY OF SALEM MA MA • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JAMES D'AMICO REQUESTING A CLERK'S OFFIC VARIANCE/SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 50 BARR STREET EXT .7001 NA -i A Io- 08 A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK Appeal from this decision, is any shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of MGL Chapter 40A and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 11, the variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision, bearing the certification of the City Clerk that 20 days have elapsed and no appeal has been filed, or that, if such appeal have 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. • CITY OF SALEM. MA • DECISION ON THE PETITION OF JAMES D'AMICO REQUESTING A SPECIAELERK'S OFFICE PERMITNARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 50 BARR STREET EXT R2 page two The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented MIMI MAY -I A 10: O$ hearing and after reviewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. The petitioner is seeking a variance from height, number of stories and lot area per dwelling units and a special permit to allow three dwelling units on the property located at 50 Barr Street Ext. that is in an R-2 Zone. 2. Several neighbors that are direct abutters spoke in opposition to the petition on the grounds that the narrowness of the street could not support the added traffic and increase of on street parking with the addition of three units. 3. Ward 6 Councillor Mike Bencal stated that he didn't think that the parking plan submitted by the petitioner could be workable and that it looked good on paper but doubted that it was practical. 4. James Fleming spoke on the history of the previous owners and uses of the property and reiterated that parking and density of the neighborhood were problem that would be difficult to eliminate. Mr. Fleming also stated that if the board approved the petition ion that he would be in land court in the morning to file an appeal of the decision. On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented, the Board Of Appeal concludes as follows: 1. Special conditions do not exist which especially affect the subject property and not the district in general. 2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would not involve substantial hardship to the petitioner. 3. The Special Permit requested cannot be granted without substantial detriment to the public good or without nullifying and substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the ordinance. 4. The granting of the Special Permit requested will not be in harmony with the neighborhood and will not promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously 0 in favor and 5 in opposition to the motion to grant the relief requested. Having failed to garner the four affirmative votes required to pass, the motion to grant fails and the petition for a Special Permit and Variance is denied. • Variance & Special Permit Denied Stephen Harris April 24, 2002 Board of Appeal carol CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL �• "�` SPP 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR 'A SALEM, MA 01970 -••• - TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 C-) N STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR M �0 T N ujcn Ul D CD Tm D �m .3 n• DECISION ON THE PETITION OF SUSAN MACFARLANE REQUESTING A SPECIo m1D PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 110 BAY VIEW AVENUE R-2 rn A hearing on this petition was held on July 17, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Richard Dionne, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belair 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. Petitioner is requesting a Special Permit to conduct a business from the residence for the property located at 110 Bay View Avenue located in an R-2 Zone. The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to this request for a Special Permit is Section 5-3 0), which provides as follows: • Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing in this Ordinance, the Board of Appeal may, in accordance with the procedure and conditions set forth in Sections 8-6 and 9-4, grant Special Permits for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming structures, and for changes, 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 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 careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing and after reviewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. The petitioner Susan MacFarlane appeared and represented herself at the hearing. 2. Petitioner explained how she would like to run a Holistic Massage & Polarity Therapy practice out of her home. 3. The petitioner's property is a two family residence. 4. Ms. MacFarlane has 3 parking spaces at her residence. Her tenant hasl space and herself and her husband have 2 spaces. 5. There were two letters submitted in opposition to the petition. One from Elizabeth • Wolfe of 95 Bay View Ave. and another from Cynthia O'Connor of 100 Bay View Ave. DECSION OF THE PETITION OF SUSAN MACFARLANE REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 110 BAY VIEW AVENUE R-2 page two 6. A petition with 11 names in support of the petition was submitted. On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows: 1. The Special Permit requested cannot be granted without substantial detriment to the public good or without nullifying and substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the ordinance. 2. The granting of the Special Permit requested will not be in harmony with the Neighborhood and will not promote the public health, safety, convenience and Welfare of the City's inhabitants. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 2 in favor and 3 in opposition to the motion to grant the relief requested. Having failed to garner the four affirmative votes required to pass, the motion to grant fails and the petition for a Special Permit is denied. Special Permit Denied • July 17, 2002 Ll oseph Barbeau, Cs =� Board of Appeal , < �o U7 vicn D oD r?r n3 C) rnz cn � 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 MGL Chapter 40A and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 11, the variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision, bearing the certification of the the City Clerk that 20 days have elapses 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 • CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSF£TITi'SOF SALEM, MA x� P BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE b $ 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MA 01970 Tip w, S 9BOgIN¢CPNA` TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 2002 DEC 30 P 3- 13 STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF NATAL & DELEILA BETTENCOURT REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 126 BAY VIEW AVENUE R-1 A hearing on this petition was held December 18, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Bonnie Belair, Stephen Harris, Nicholas Helides and Richard Dionne. 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 relief from side setback to construct a 3- season sunroom for the property located at 126 Bay View Avenue 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner appeared and represented herself at the hearing. 2. Plans were submitted showing the proposed sunroom. 3. Two letters from neighbors were submitted in support of the petition. 4. There was no opposition to this petition. • CITY OF SALEM. MA CLERK'S OFFICE • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF NATAL & DELIELA BETTENCOURT REQUESTING VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 126 BAY VIEW AVENUE R-1 pagetwo 1001 DEC 30 P 3: I"3 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 5-0 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 plans and dimension 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. VARIANCE GRANTED DECEMBER -3DECEMBER 18, 2002 Bonnie Belair C SCS Board of Appeal • CtTY OF SALEM. 14A CLERK'S OFFtdE' • A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CIITY CLERK - ' .1001 DEC,30 h 3. 1.,3 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 day 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 • • �.0 CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS ye�6 BOARD OF APPEAL Cj; � 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • 1 l'iRc' SALEM, MA 01 970 ��+I•� U. �• , �a 'iJge�mNB, S' TEL. (978) 745-9595 ACL P FAX (978) 740.9846 STANLEYMAYOR VICZ, JR. 1�n1 S�1725 ^1n r0 O2 DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MICHELLE GALLANT REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 BAY VIEW CIRCLE R-1 A hearing on this petition was held on September 18,2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Nicholas Helides, Joseph Barbeau and Bonnie Belair. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and others and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. Petitioner requests a Special Permit to operate a home business (Massage Therapy) for the property located at 7 Bay View Circle located in a R-1 zone. The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to this request for a Special Permit is section 5-3 (2) (8), which provides as follows: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing in this Ordinance, the Board of Appeal may, in accordance with the procedure and conditions set forth in Section 8-6 and 9-4, grant Special Permits for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming . structures, and for changes, enlargement, extension of expansion, of nonconforming lots, land, structures, and uses, provided however, that such change, extension, enlargement of 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. A. Special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect the land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other lands, buildings or stuctures in the same district. B. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve Substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner. . C. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and Without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the ordinance. The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: • Cl, ' • DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MICHELLE GALLANT REQUESTING A SPECIAL ICE PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 BAY VIEW CIRCLE R-1 page two 1. Petitioner Michelle Gallant appeared and represented herself at the hearing.zS A 10 Q� 2. Ms. Gallant would like to conduct massage therapy out of her home 3. Petitioner submitted a letter signed by 13 neighbors in support of the petition. 4. There was no opposition to the petition. 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. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would involve substantial hardship on the petitioner. 2. The relief requested 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. 3. The Special Permit granted can be granted in harmony with the neighborhood and will promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants. • Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 4 in favor and 1 in opposition, to grant the relief requested, subject to the following conditions: 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statues, codes ordinances and regulations. 2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted and approved by the Building Inspector. 3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 4. Petition granted for a period of 3 years. SPECIAL PERMIT GRANTED September 18, 2002 Nicholas Helides Board of Appeals • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF MICHELLE GALLANT REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 BAY VIEW CIRCLE 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 MGL Chapter 40A, and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 11, the Variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision, bearing the certification of the City Clerk that the 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. a � n , � tr, c; C O • CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS PQ BOARD OF APPEAL CITY SALEM, NALERf OF SALEM, OFFICE '-' 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR I' o. SALEM, MA 01 970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 1001 AUG 22 P 2: 22 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF LAURA REHIM REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 27 BELLEAU ROAD R-1 A hearing on this petition was held August 21, 2002 the following Board Members were present: Nina Cohen Chairman, Bonnie Belair, Richard Dionne, Joan Boudreau, 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. At the request of the petitioner the Salem Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant leave to withdraw this petition without prejudice for a Variance from density and side yard setback to construct a deck rear setback for the property located at 27 Belleau Road located in a R-1 zone. GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE August 21, 2002 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 �onm CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY S 2 gj 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERff• AL EM• MA SALEM, MA 01970 S OFFICE • �s TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. ZOOZ MAYOR MAY A Ip, 8 . DECISION ON THE PETITION OF DANIEL BOYCE REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 40 BOSTON STREET R2 A hearing on this petition was held on April 24,2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Richard Dionne, Stephen Harris, Nicholas Helides 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. Petitioner requests a Special Permit to alter a lawful non-conforming use from the retail sale of clothing to a small law practice for the property located at 40 Boston Street located in a R-2 zone. The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to this request for a Special Permit is section 5-3 (2) (8), which provides as follows: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing in this Ordinance, the Board of • Appeal may, in accordance with the procedure and conditions set forth in Section 8-6 and 9-4, grant Special Permits for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming structures, and for changes, enlargement, extension of expansion, of nonconforming lots, land, structures, and uses, provided however, that such change, extension, enlargement of 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. A. Special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect the land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other lands, buildings or stuctures in the same district. B. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve Substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner. C. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and Without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the ordinance. The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: • CITY OF SALEM, MA CLERK'S OFFICE • DECISION ON THE PETITION OF DANIEL BOYCE REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 40 BOSTON STREET R-2 page two 1001 MAY -1 A 10: Oq 1. Petitioner Daniel S. Boyce, Esq. seeks a special permit to open a small law practice in a building which previously housed a variety of nonconforming uses, most recently a used clothing store. 2. Two neighbors, Stanley Schwartz and Martin Yim, spoke in support of the Proposed special permit on the grounds that they felt the proposed law practice Would fit in the neighborhood. They also confirmed that the Federal Street Neighborhood Association had given its support to the petitioner's proposal. 3. There was no opposition to the plans. 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. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would involve substantial hardship on the petitioner. 2. The relief requested 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. 3. The Special Permit granted can be granted in harmony with the neighborhood and will promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant the relief requested, subject to the following conditions: 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statues, codes ordinances and regulations. 2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted and approved by the Building Inspector. 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. Special Permit Granted Nina Cohen CSS \ April 24, 2002 Board of Appeal J • CITY OF SALEM MA CLERIC'S OFFICE ZO�Z NAY A 10: Oq DECISION OF THE PETITION OF DANIEL BOYCE REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 40 BOSTON STREET R-2 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 MGL Chapter 40A, and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 11, the Variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision, bearing the certification of the City Clerk that the 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. • • Co r CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETT!SI( y OF v6 ' 120 WASBH IONGRTO OST REETE 3RD FLOOR �L ERK S OFFICE A • a i �c� SALEM, MA 01 970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 Fax (978) 740-9846 10Q1 STANLEY J. VICZ, .1R. MAY -3 P 3� 'S DECISION ON THE PETITION OF ROBERT BROPHY JR REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 165 BOSTON STREET B-2 A hearing on this petition was held on April 24,2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Richard Dionne, Stephen Harris, Nicholas Halides 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. Petitioner requests a Special Permit to conduct a detailing and motor vehicle vinyl graphic business for the property located at 165 Boston Street located in a B-2 zone. The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to this request for a Special Permit is section 5-3 (2) (8), which provides as follows: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing in this Ordinance, the Board of Appeal may, in accordance with the procedure and conditions set forth in Section 8-6 • and 9-4, grant Special Permits for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming structures, and for changes, enlargement, extension of expansion, of nonconforming lots, land, structures, and uses, provided however, that such change, extension, enlargement of 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. A. Special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect the land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other lands, buildings or stuctures in the same district. B. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve Substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner. C. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and Without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the ordinance. The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: • • DECISION ON THE PETITION OF ROBERT BROPHY JR. REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 165 BOSTON STREET B-2 page two 1. Attorney Stephen E. Kiley, of 41-akeview Ave. in Lynn, Ma, represented the petitioner. 2. Councillor Leonard O'Leary sent a letter in favor of the petition. 3. There was no opposition to the plans. 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. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would involve substantial hardship on the petitioner. 2. The relief requested 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. 3. The Special Permit granted can be granted in harmony with the neighborhood and will promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants. • Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant the relief requested, subject to the following conditions: 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statues, codes ordinances and regulations. 2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted and approved by the Building Inspector. 3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 4. A Certificate of Inspection shall be obtained. Ila Special Permit GrantediR chard Dionne / S( n,� April 24, 2002 Board of Appeal l • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ROBERT BROPHY JR REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 165 BOSTON STREET B-2 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 MGL Chapter 40A, and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 11, the Variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision, bearing the certification of the City Clerk that the 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. • .�o CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEM, MA 2 °y, 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE • I a SALEM, MA 01970 • TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY.J. USOVICZ, JR. 2001 FEB 22 P I: 3h MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OFJAMES OUELLETTE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5 BARNES ROAD/393 HIGHLAND AVENUE R-1 A hearing on this petition was held February 20, 2002 the following Board Members were present: Nina Cohen Chairman, Stephen Harris, Nicholas Helides and Bonnie Belair. 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 the Salem Board of Appeal voted 4-0, to grant leave to withdraw this petition without prejudice for Variances from maximum lot area, maximum lot width, side yard and front yard for resubdivision of existing three lots into four residential lots for the property located at 5 Barnes Road/393 Highland Avenue. GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE ` FEBRUARY 20, 2002 L) Ccc jp� 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 0o CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEM. MA ®' 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE f r SALEM, MA O 1970 • ,y,� TEL.(978) 745-9595 'oma FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 1001 MAR _5 P 2--' J'1 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF PEABODY GLASS & MIRROR REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 164 R BOSTON STREET/29 HOWLEY STREET I A hearing on this petition was held February 20, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belair 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. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from side yard setback to construct an addition to the existing building at 291-lowley Street in Peabody, also known as 164 R Boston Street located in an Industrial District. 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner desires to construct a 62' x 32 'addition to an existing business property located at 29 Howley Street in Peabody with a Salem address of 164R Boston Street. The existing brick building is nonconforming with respect to lot size, lot coverage, front yard setback and side yard setback. The proposed addition would increase the nonconformity in each of these areas. The requested side yard setback was to 6 ft of the Harmony Grove Road property line. 2. Petitioner states that he plans to continue to operate two existing businesses on that property; the Peabody Glass & Mirror business and a business call Allen Seat Cover. He further stated that he would not add additional businesses to the site. • 3. Attorney John Keilty of 40 Lowell Street in Peabody represented the petitioner. CITY OF SALEM. MA CLERK'S OFFICE • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF PEABODY GLASS & MIRROR REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 164R BOSTON STREET I pagetwo 1001 MAR -5 P 2: 31 4. Petitioner stated that he received an Order of Conditions from the Salem Conservation Commission concerning the proposed addition, which was placed on the street side of the property in order to lessen the impact of the property on the North River. 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. A Certificate of Inspection shall be obtained. 5. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction. 6. Exterior finishes of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing structure. 7. Petitioner shall obtain proper street numbering from the City of Salem Assessors Office and shall display said number so as to be visible from the street. S. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to the Conservation Board. 9. Petitioner to install and maintain a 4 foot black metal fence around the perimeter of • the property along Harmony Grove Ave. as he agreed. VARIANCE GRANTED Nina Cohen, Chairman CITY OF SALEM, MA CLERK'S OFFICE A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK 2002 MAR -5 P 2, 3l 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 • • 11 CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSE75rSt, OF SALEM. MA BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MA 01970 • �.r�--.�.. S 9��MINB gyp' TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-984e jp01 DEC 30 P 3 13 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MARK CONNELLY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 156 BRIDGE STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held on December 18, 2002, with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Stephen Harris, Joan Boudreau, Richard Dionne and Bonnie Belair. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and other and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting Variances to allow the construction of a third floor unit for the property located at 156 Bridge Street located in an R-2 zone. The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding of the Board that: a. Special conditions and circumstances exit which especially affect the land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other lands, buildings or structures in the same district. b. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve • substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner c. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance. The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Attorney Stephen Lovely of 14 Story Street appeared and represented his petitioner. 2. The property is currently being used as an illegal three family. 3. A letter from Councillor Regina Flynn was read in opposition to the proposal. 4. The property has previously been denied as use as a three family. • CITY OF SALEM. MA CLERK'S OFFICE • DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MARK CONNELLY EQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED A 156 BRIDGE STREET R-2 page two 1001.DEC30' P. 13 On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented at the hearing, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows: 1. Special conditions do not exist which especially affect the subject property and not the district in general. 2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would not result in unnecessary hardship to the petitioner. 3. The relief requested cannot be granted without substantial detriment to the public good or without nullifying and substantially hardship derogating from the intent of the district or purpose of the Ordinance. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 2 in favor and 3 in opposition to grant the requested variances. Having failed to garner the four affirmative votes required to pass, the motion is defeated and the petition is denied. VARIANCE DENIED DECEMBER 18, 2002 don(rie Belair` !)I sc� Board of Appea A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK Appeal from this decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of the MGL Chapter 40A and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 11, the Variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the Certification of the City Clerk that 20 days have passed and no appeal has been filed, or that, if such appeal has been filed, that it has been dismissed or denied is recorded in the South Essex Registry of Deeds and indexed under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owners Certificate of Title. • Board of Appeal v6�co^rid CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUS& 10E-S OFFICE A g . BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR �so SALEM, MA 01970 • �sgq� R' TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 2002 JUL 25 P Z. 3q STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF HELEN SIDES REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 35 BROAD STREET R1 A hearing on this petition was held July 17, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Joan Boudreau, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair and Nicholas Helides 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 rear yard setback to construct a 2-story addition for the property located at 35 Broad Street R-1 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1.The petitioner appeared and represented herself at the hearing 2. Plans were submitted showing the proposed addition to be constructed. 3. There was no opposition to this petition. . • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF HELEN SIDES REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR • THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 35 BROAD STREET R-1 page two 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 5-0 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. VARIANCE GRANTED p July 17, 2002 Joan Boudreau au") Board of Appeal 0 o _n H C7 y m C -7 O r-n ViN D N � .. c7 m� -O D • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF HELEN SIDES REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 35 BROAD STREET R1 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 day 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 • n N C n� ti r-t M �o (Nri oD O nrn T3 N n• m3 W D • v�rco CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETITS3 LCA . MA BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • s� SALEM, MA O 1970 �BO�MMeo� TEL. (978) 745-9595 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. FAX (978) 740-9846 ZOO? JUN 25 A 10: 09 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF MARSHALL STRAIUSS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 51 BROAD STREET R-2 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 & side setback to construct a front porch for the property located at 51 Broad Street located in an R-2 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner is seeking relief from density regulations to construct a front porch and seeking relief from front and side setback requirement. The front setback will be 1 foot instead of the required 10 feet. The side setback will be 5 feet instead of the required 10 feet. 2. Carol Kelley of 49 Broad Street spoke in support of the petition. 3. There was no opposition to the petition. 0 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF MARSHALL STRAUSS REQUESTING A . VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 51 BROAD STREET F=3-2 page two On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on, the evidence presente d 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 i 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. VARIANCE GRANTED June 19, 2002 Nicholas Helides 'cl(cY� Board of Appeal c rn C!1 C)r-, D -n s M m� C:) D 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 1 7 of the Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, and shall be filed within 2 0 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 C: M G 'p G Z `r N U; D "C. C; Q rn O T' • CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETOTSY OF SALEM. MA BOARD OF APPEAL /l 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE SALEM, 01970 gB��Ne TEL. (978)) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 ZOOZ FEB 22 P I: 3 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 3 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ALAN WALL REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 23 BUFFUM STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held February 20, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belair 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. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from density, side yard and rear yard setback to allow an addition that was previously built for the property located at 23 Buff urn Street located in an R-2 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. The petitioner Alan Wall is requesting a variance from density, side yard and rear yard setback for an existing addition that predated his purchase of the property. 2. Charlene Long an abutter residing at 21 1/2 Buff urn Street spoke in favor of the petitioners request for the variances. 3. There was no opposition to the proposed petition. 0 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ALAN WALL REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 22 BUFFUM STREET R-2 page two 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 obtain a Certificate of Inspection. Variance Granted ,3 C,/LQ,y 7cc February 20, 2002 Stephen Harris Board of Appeals A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK Appeal from this decision, if any, 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 CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS U. L;r Lc . MA BOARD OF APPEAL CLE-RK SOFFI, ,C_F - 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR Ifo SALEM, MA 01970 • 9BQ,y�rygLye TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 iGJ1 JUN 25 A 10: 1 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ROBERT I'ITALIEN REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 64 BUFFUM STREET R-2 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 residential density and a side setback of 4 feet to construct an addition front & rear setback to construct an addition for the property located at 64 Buff um Street located in an R-2 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner representing his mother Elieen L'Italien, desires to construct an addition to the property located at 64 Buff um Street. The proposed addition will be at the rear of the existing structure and will have dimension of 11' 7.5" x 23' x 7.5" The proposed addition will increase lot coverage density and have a side setback of 4 feet instead of the required 10 feet. 2. The petitioner presented 5 letters in support of the petition. The letters were received and read into the minutes. Letters were received from the following: Clair Chalifour, 4 Bryant Street, Nance Bacigalupo/Sue Dowing of 5 Symonds Street, Edward & Ruth Bartnicki of 62 Buff urn Street , Judith Rodgers of 3 Symond Street and Philip & Cheryl Daniels of 60 Buffum Street. • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ROBERT L'ITALIEN REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 64 BUFFUM STREET STREET R-2 page two 3. There was no opposition to the petition. 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 b ut not the district in general. 2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would i nvolve 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. VARIANCE GRANTED June 19, 2002 Nicholas Helides Board of Appeal c z � • CII is CD�- -n�: Z5 C");. 'v 0 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 • 0 r r� c �c: N Ul t C) D n` o r" • o CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEM. MA 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE � • 1 SALEM, MA 01970 s 98 TEL. (978) 745-9595 p'n^B FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. 10010CT 29 A 9-- 58 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF HERCULANDO PEREIRA REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 64 BUTLER STREET R-1 A hearing on this petition was held October 16, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Joan Boudreau, Stephen Harris, 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 number of stories allowed to construct a third floor for the property located at 64 Butler Street 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner, Herculando Pereira was requesting a variance to allow the use of the third floor as living space for the second floor unit that the petitioner and his family currently occupy. Structural changes include adding two full shed dormers along each side of the roof. This would allow for three new bedrooms and a full bathroom on the third floor. 2. Mary McNeil of 67 Butler Street was in opposition of this petition stating that the possibility that the renovations would be used to add a third unit to the property. 3. The property is located in an R-1 zone and is also a "grandfathered"tow family unit. aDECISION OF THE PETITION OF HERCULANDO PEREIRA REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 64 BUTLER STREET R-1 page two 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 5-0 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 plans and dimension 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. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained. 6. Exterior finishes of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing structure. 7. The property is to remain a two family and shall not be converted to a three family unit. VARIANCE GRANTED OCTOBER 16, 2002 _ Stephen Harris CS Board of Appeal • A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CIITY 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 day 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 • • ca CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEM. MA n 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE SALEM,• 01 970� TEL. (978)) 7 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. 1001 JAN 28 P 12: O4 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF DIANE & DOMINIC DELORENZO REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 10 CALABRESE STREET R-1 A hearing on this petition was held January 16, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Richard Dionne, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belair 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. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from front setback to construct a farmer's porch for the property located at 10 Calabrese Street located in a 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner appeared before the Board to request a front setback of 12 feet to allow construction of a raised front porch to enclose the existing door and extend 20feet along the front of the existing structure. 2. Plans were submitted showing the proposed construction. 3. There was no opposition to the proposed petition. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF DIANE & DOMINIC DELORENZO REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 10 CALABRESE STREET R-1 page two 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 5-0, to grant the Variances requested, subject to the following conditions; 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statures, ordinances, codes and regulations. • 2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted. 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. A Certificate of Inspection shall be obtained. 6. Exterior finishes of the new construction shall be in harmony with existing structure. VARIANCE GRANTED �/ JANUARY 16, 2002 "�(/112'CJ ( LJC�'J Nina Cohen Chairman, Board of Appeals • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF DIANE & DOMINIC DELORENZO REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 10 CALABRESE STREET 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: r �oenro CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL � e 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MA 01970 n TEL. (978) 745-9595 o n� FAX (978) 740-9846 ^' r� STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. - n %OC—,',—,', MAYOR -0 oD r -n3 N ren g DECISION OF THE PETITION OF H H MORANT & CO REQUESTING A VARIANCEoo v FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 33 CHESTNUT STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held December 18, 2002 meeting with the following Board Members were present: Nina Cohen Chairman, Richard Dionne, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belair 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. At the request of the petitioner's Architect H H Morant, the Salem Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant leave to withdraw this petition without prejudice requesting a Variance from side yard setback to construct a second story addition for the property located at33 Chestnut Street located in an R-2 zone. • GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE DECEMBER 18, 2002 Cscr�) 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. 0 Board of Appeal CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS CITY �- BOARD OF APPEAL OF SALEM MA _ 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLER►(�,S OFFICE • ` �a SALEM, MA 01970 ge� ep TEL. (978) 745-9595 Fax (978) 740-9846 STANLEY MAYOR .JR. 100114AY -3 P 3. I S . DECISION OF THE PETITION OF PATRICK CHASSE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12 CLEVELAND STREET R-1 A hearing on this petition was held April 24, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Richard Dionne, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belair 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. The petitioner is requesting a Variance for a 9 foot front yard setback (instead of 15 foot), to construct a farmers porch with set of stairs for the property located at 12 Cleveland Street 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Attorney Stephen Lovely represented the petitioner. 2. The petitioner presented plans of the proposed porch. 3. There was no opposition to the plans. • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF PATRICK CHASSE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12 CLEVELAND STREET R-1 page two 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 5-0 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. A Certificate of Inspection is to be obtained. 7. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board of Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Conservation Commission. VARIANCE GRANTED ` APRIL 24, 2002 Richard Dionne 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 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 • • co CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL LITY OF SALEM, MA 2 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745.9595 FAx (978)740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 1001 FEB 22 P I: 33 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF WENDI GOLDSMITH REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 18 COMMERCIAL STREET BPD A hearing on this petition was held February 20, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belair 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. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from front yard setback for improvement to fagade including a greenhouse addition for the property located 18 Commercial Street located in an BPD 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. The petitioner Wendi Goldsmith was requesting a variance from front yard setback to construct a greenhouse addition for the property at 18 Commercial Street. 2. Robert Wilde represented W endi Goldsmith and explained to the board that this variance had been approved but the two year start time requirement had run out prior to Ms. Goldsmiths opportunity to begin the project. 3. The front yard setback will be 24' rather than the required 50' • 4. There was no opposition to the proposed petition. DECISION OF THE PETITION OF WENDI GOLDSMITH REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 18 COMMERCIAL STREET BPD page two 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. A Certificate of Inspection is to be obtained. Variance Granted February 20, 2002 Stephen Harris Board of Appeals A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK Appeal from this decision, if any, 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. ¢o CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEM..MA 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE • 1 ��� SALEM, MA 01970 ' TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. `.1UO2 MAR 2l P 3. 21 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ELIZABETH BRADT REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 20 COMMERCIAL STREETBPD A hearing on this petition was held March 20, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Richard Dionne, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belair 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. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from front, side and rear setbacks and a Variance from the buffer zone to allow the construction of a new building for the property located at property located at 20 Commercial Street in a BPD 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Attorney Joseph Correnti, 63 Federal Street, Salem represented the petitioner. 2. The Petitioner, Dr. Elizabeth Bradt, is the owner of the property located at 20 Commercial Street. 3. Dr. Bradt is.a licensed veterinarian who plans to use the property to create a new veterinary office. This Board by Special Permit dated November 23, 1999, and extended through May 22, 2002 allowed the veterinary office use. The Petitioner is requesting a further three-month extension of this Special Permit, through August 22, 2002, so as to allow sufficient time to begin construction on the newly revised plan submitted with this petition • 4. The Petitioner has appeared before this Board on November 17, 1999, March 21, 2001 and October 30, 2002, and has obtained Variances to reconstruct portions of . DECISION OF THE PETITION OFELIZABETH BRADT REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 20 COMMERCIAL STREET BPD page two the existing building on the premises. 5. The current plan, as submitted, proposes to demolish the existing building and to Rebuild a new single-story structure of approximately 5,096 square feet, which is 1,700 square feet smaller than the plan previously approved by the Board. 6. The present petition seeks Variances from the front, side, and rear yard setbacks, As well as the required buffer zone in this BPD district, so as to allow the construction of the building as shown on the plan. Specifically, the Petitioner has requested a front yard setback of 31.9 feet, a side yard setback of 9.1-feet, a rear yard setback of 9.8 feet, and a residential buffer zone setback of 55 feet. 7. The plan, as submitted, proposes 19 parking spaces, which is sufficient to serve the needs of the veterinary office. 8. That due to the size and shape of the lot, the Petitioner would effectively be prohibited from building any structure whatsoever without the requested relief. 9. The proposed use in this business zone is complimentary and will not adversely Impact the existing use in that area. • 10. The plan, as submitted, will allow for more green space and open areas on the lot Compared to the previously approved plan. 11. The granting of a three month extension for the Special Permit allowing the Veterinary office use, through August 22, 2002, will allow the Petitioner sufficient time to begin construction on the newly revised plan submitted with this Petition. 12. There was no opposition to the petition. 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 5-0, to grant the Variances requested, subject to the following conditions; • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ELIZABETH BRADT REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 20 COMMERCIAL STREET BPD page three 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. Petitioner is to obtain a Certificate of Inspection. 6. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board of Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Planning Board. 7. No outdoor kenneling of animals is permitted. • VARIANCE GRANTED & SPECIAL PERMIT EXTENDED MARCH 20, 2002 Nicholas Helides Board of Appeal • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ELIZABETH BRADT REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 20 COMMERCIAL STREET BPD page four 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 • • CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEM. MA 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE ®@ • `� SALEM, MA 01970 ••^• TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAx (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 1002 OCT 29 P 3: OS MAYOR DECISION ON THE PETITION OF JOSPEH PARSHLEY REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16 CONNOR ROAD R-1 A hearing on this petition was held on October 16, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Nicholas Helides, Stephen Harris, Joseph Barbeau 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. Petitioner requests a Special Permit from side yard setback to install a pool for the property located at 16 Connor Road located in a R-1 zone. The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to this request for a Special Permit is section 5-3 (2) (8), which provides as follows: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing in this Ordinance, the Board of Appeal may, in accordance with the procedure and conditions set forth in Section 8-6 • and 9-4, grant Special Permits for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming structures, and for changes, enlargement, extension of expansion, of nonconforming lots, land, structures, and uses, provided however, that such change, extension, enlargement of 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. A. Special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect the land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other lands, buildings or stuctures in the same district. B. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve Substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner. C. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and Without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the ordinance. The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: • • DECISION ON THE PETITION OF JOSEPH PARSHLEY REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16 CONNOR ROAD R-1 page two 1. Petitioner is requesting a Special Permit from side setback to install a pool. 2. The pool size is approximately 18 x 24 and does not meet the side yard setback.. 3. A neighbor spoke in favor the petition. 4. There was no opposition to this petition. 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. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would involve substantial hardship on the petitioner. 2. The relief requested 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. 3. The Special Permit granted can be granted in harmony with the neighborhood and • will promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 5 in favor and 0 in opposition, to grant the relief requested, subject to the following conditions: 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statues, codes ordinances and regulations. 2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted and approved by the Building Inspector. 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. Petitioner shall comply with all pool ordinances. SPECIAL PERMIT GRANTED October 16, 2002 J213oudreau /' �'C�- • Board of Appeals W i 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 MGL Chapter 40A, and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 11, the Variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision, bearing the certification of the City Clerk that the 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. • • 'Co^ITMO CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEM.,MA 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE . \ SALEM, MA 01970 "F TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. . .10 01 DEC, 3.0 P 3: 1.3 MAYOR - ... DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MATTHEW ABRAMS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 13 COUSINS STREET R-2 A hearing on.this petition was held on December 18, 2002, with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Stephen Harris, Joan Boudreau, Richard Dionne and Nicholas Helides Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and other and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting a use Variance and density regulations to allow demolition of existing structure used as a social club and construction of 3 buildings to be used for 8 residential units for the property located at 13 Cousins Street located in an R-2 zone. The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding of the Board that: a. Special conditions and circumstances exit which especially affect the land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other lands, buildings or • structures in the same district. b. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner c. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance. The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Attorney George Atkins, Esq. of 59 Federal Street in Salem, represented the petitioner Matthew Abrams. In requesting a use variance and variance for density for the demolition of the existing structure and the construction of 8 residential units for the property at 13 Cousins Street. 2. The property is located in an R-2 zone. 3. There were several abutters that were in opposition to the petition citing the increased density as their reasons for objecting to the petition. 4. One person, an abutter that owned 8 1./2 Allen Street was in favor of the petition. 5. The membership of the Polish Falcons Club spoke in favor of the petition stating that they thought the best use of the property should be a residential use. 6. Att.Atkins stated that the shape of the lot posed a hardship that would make it difficult to develop the property. • 7. The Zoning Board of Appeals voted 3 in favor and 2 in opposition. The petition was denied. CITY OF SALEM,. MA CLERK'S OFFICE • DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MATTHEW ABRAMS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED A 13 COUSINS STREET R-2 page two 100i OEC'30 P 3:' 13 On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented at the hearing, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows: 1. Special conditions do not exist which especially affect the subject property and not the district in general. 2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would not result in unnecessary hardship to the petitioner. 3. The relief requested cannot be granted without substantial detriment to the public good or without nullifying and substantially hardship derogating from the intent of the district or purpose of the Ordinance. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 3 in favor and 2 in opposition to grant the requested variances. Having failed to garner the four affirmative votes required to pass, the motion is defeated and the petition is denied. VARIANCE DENIED DECEMBER 18, 2002 Stephen Harris 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 MGL Chapter 40A and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 11, the Variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the Certification of the City Clerk that 20 days have passed and no appeal has been filed, or that, if such appeal has been filed, that it has been dismissed or denied is recorded in the South Essex Registry of Deeds and indexed under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owners Certificate of Title. Board of Appeal • vgNCO CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS CITY OF BOARD OF APPEAL SALEM MA 1 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE • �. SALEM, MA 01970 �s . TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 i 1001 OCT STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 21 P MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF MATTHEW ABRAMS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 13 COUSINS STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held October 16, 2002 meeting with the following Board Members were present: Nina Cohen Chairman, Nicholas Helides, Joseph Barbeau, Joan Boudreau 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. At the request of the petitioner's Attorney George Atkins, the Salem Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant leave to withdraw this petition without prejudice for a use Variance and density regulations to allow for demolition of existing structure and construction of 3 buildings to be used for 8 residential units for the property located at 13 Cousins Street located in an R-2 zone. • GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE OCTOBER 16, 2002 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. �oaa CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEM. MA p ig 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE } f5* SALEM, MAO 1970 0TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 1 .1001 DEC -2 P 2. 38 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ALBERT DELEON REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 24 CRESCENT DRIVE R-1 A hearing on this petition was held November 20, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Joan Boudreau, Stephen Harris, Nicholas Helides and Richard Dionne. 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 side and rear setbacks to construct a 2 car garage with family room above for the property located at 24 Crescent Drive 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner, Albert Deleon appeared with his Architect David Jaquith and presented plans for a two -car garage with a family room above. Petitioner needs variances from side and rear setbacks. 2. A petition was submitted with 7 names in favor of the petition was submitted. 3. Sharon Denano of Gallows Hill Road appeared to see the plans for the proposed garage. Ms. Denano stated she was in favor of the petition. 4. There was no opposition. • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ALBERT DELEON REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 24 CRESCENT DRIVE R-1 page two 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 5-0 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 plans and dimension 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. VARIANCE GRANTED NOVEMBER 20, 2002 Nina Cohen Board of Appeal • A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND • THE CIITY 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 day 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 • • v�;go CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS Cl Y OF S.4L,- ® BOARD OF APPEAL LEHK SOcM• NA 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR FFICE SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 10p1 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. AR _5 P 2` 38 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JAMES ATWOOD REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4 CROSS AVENUE R-1 A hearing on this petition was held February 20, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belair 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. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from frontage, side yard, rear yard, maximum lot area per dwelling and number of stories to reconstruct single family dwelling for the property located at 4 Cross Avenue 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner desires to reconstruct an existing single family dwelling to remediate structural problems arising from dry rot. The proposed reconstruction was shown on architectural plans submitted by petitioner, drawn by Maynard A. Davis of 26 Southern Ave. in Essex. The site was shown on a plot plan by CEC Land Surveyors Inc of Peabody dated 12/3/01. 2. As support for this petition, Mr. Atwood described the lot. The upper portion slopes steeply from a rise on Cross Ave. to a lower portion on the Chevel Ave. property line. Building a home on the slope would be prohibitively expensive, and any structure • built on the central portion of the lot would tend to block ocean views of abutters both on Cross Ave and Chevel Ave CITY OF Q • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JAMES ATWOOD REQUESTING A VAR ANC�E 3ALENOFFICE A FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4 CROSS AVENUE R-1 page two 1001 NAR 3. Several neighbors and abutters appeared and spoke in support of the proposed S P z: 38 house plans. There were Bill Scott, 3 Cross Ave, Gregory Green, 8 Cheval Ave., Mike & Lisa Morency, 2 Star Ave, Ken Green, 2 Star Ave, Ed Wolf, 95 Bay View Ave., and Paul Koloseus, 2 Cross Ave. With respect to the hardship requirement, these neighbors provided evidence in support of petitioner's claim. 4. The Awtoods also submitted a request for a variance from lot coverage limitations to erect a detached 20 x 20 two-car garage along the Cheval Ave. property line, This proposal was opposed by the Greens, who argued that their line of view to the ocean would be detrimentally affected. Petitioners then agreed to withdraw the portion of their petitions concerning the proposed garage without prejudice to their right to resubmit that plan or a revised plan at a latter date. 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. A Certificate of Occupancy is to be obtained. 5. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction. 6. Petitioner shall submit revised sit plan without the garage. Variance Granted /J/� ti �a Q ,ti, CSCt`Jj • February 20, 2002 Nina Cohen, Chairman CITY OF SALEM MA CLERK'S OFFICE • A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK ,ZOOZ MAR -S P �o Appeal from this decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of the 2' -)u 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 • • v6�CONT,�� CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS ye ,.`Sl .. BOARD OF APPEAL CITY Or SALEP1. PSA 3 6g, 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOORCLERK'S OFFICE alit �W SALEM, MA 01970 • � 'g� TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. Z002 AUG 29 P 1: 41 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF SAMUEL PAPALARDO JR. REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6 DEARBORN LANE R1 A hearing on this petition was held August 21, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Joan Boudreau, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair 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. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from side setback to construct an addition for the property located at 6 Dearborn Lane R-1 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1.The petitioner appeared and represented himself at the hearing 2. Plans were submitted showing the proposed addition to be constructed. 3. A petition was submitted with 4 abutters in favor or the petition. 4. There was no opposition to the plans. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF SAMUEL PAPALARDO JR. REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6 DEARBORN LANE 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 5-0 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. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained. VARIANCE GRANTED August 21, 2002 / i hard Dionne Cgs CgC Board of Appeal a r C= m � �G N -0 0 2> m� • _ C) m3 D DECISION OF THE PETITION OF SAMUEL PAPALARDO JR. REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6 DEARBORN LANE R1 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 day 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 • N n G n N r'C C �C N ujcn oD r n ma � D • v��co irk CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEM MA ° CLERPt'S OFFICE ®� 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, 970 qgp� TEL. (97B)) 7 7455-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 1001 OCT 20 A ID SO MAYOR REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF THE VARIANCE GRANTED FOR JOSEPH CORRENTI FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 55 DEARBORN STREET R-1 At the hearing held on October 16, 2002, the Board of Appeal voted unanimously to allow a six (6) month extension for the Variance granted for Joseph Correnti for the property located at 55 Dearborn Street. The six (6) month extension is based on the previous decision having been recorded at the City Clerk's office on November 14, 2001. ac Nina Cohen, Chairman Board of Appeal • ONO7 CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS CITY OF SALEM. MA yc" ` BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE � 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MA 01970 • mHsWc' TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 1001 OCT — STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. ) A 38 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF AMERADA HESS CORPORATION REQUESTING A MODIFICATION & ENTENSION OF VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 295 DERBY STREET B-5 A hearing on this petition was held September 18, 2002, with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Stephen Harris, Nicholas Helides, Joseph Barbeau and Bonnie Belair. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and others and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. Petitioner is requesting an extension and modification of a Decision of this Board dated November 14, 2001 (the Prior Decision), the Prior Decision granted a Special Permit to alter a non-conforming structure and Variance from dimensional requirements of the Salem Zoning Ordinance. The provisions the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to the request for a Special Permit is section 5-3 0), which provides as follows: • Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing in this Ordinance, the Board of Appeal may, in accordance with the procedure and conditions set forth in Sections 8-6 and 9-4, grant Special Permits for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming structures, and for changes, enlargement, extent 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 use to the neighborhood. In more general terms, this Board is, when reviewing Special Permit requests, guided by the rules 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 Variances which have been requested may be granted upon a finding of the 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 or structures in the same district. B. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner. C. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and • without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the of the Ordinance • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF AMERADA HESS CORPORATION REQUESTING A MODIFICATION & EXTENSION OF VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 295 DERBY STREET B-5 page two The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented, and after viewing the plans makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner, Amerada Hess Corporation, proposes to upgrade an existing gasoline service station located at 295 Derby St. Salem, adding a new 24-hour convenience store. John Kusich of Bohler Engineering, 352 Turnpike Road, Southborough Ma. and by Philip C. Lombardo Jr. Esq. Seder & Chandler, 339 Main Street, Worcester, Ma.represented the Petitioner. 2. The prior decision approved the upgrade of the gasoline station, which includes the following: (a) .a 1,660 square foot retail store toward the rear of the property (encroaching on the side yard setback area) with 9 front-entering parking spaces, including a handicap accessible space abutting the storefront; (b) 4 new gasoline fuel pumps under an existing canopy that is 14.5 feet the property line and within the 15 foot gasoline dispenser setback line; • © an identifying sign to be relocated to the front left side of the property 2.5 feet from the line (and within the side yard setback area); (d) a trash enclosure to be located within the right side yard setback area. 3. The Prior Decision found appropriate grounds for granted the Variances and Special Permit. 4. The new plan introduced by the Petitioner indicated several changes from the plan approved by the Prior Decision, namely; (a) Due to changes to the building made in response to comments from City of Salem Planning, and Salem Redevelopment Authority, the convenience store design, including the roof and fagade, has changed and the building has been relocated. The new building will extend to within 7 feet of the side lot line along the eastern.portion of the property. (b) The trash enclosure will be reduced in size, so that no variance will be required from side setback requirements. © The number of off-street parking spaces will be reduced 9 to 8. (d) The existing free-standing sign will not be relocated and will remain in place (e) Hess will install a walkway on the eastern portion of the property Leading to a 10-foot walkway along the rear of the property. This will be done to comply with one of the conditions of the Prior Decision, namely, that the Petitioner worked with the City of Salem Planning • officials with respect to the riverfront walk/bike path to enable public access to the • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF AMERADA HESS COROPRATION REQUESTING 'A MODIFICATION AND EXTENSION OF A VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 295 DERBY STREET B-5 page three portion of the proposed path and to obtain a Chapter 91 license in connection with the proposed improvements. (e) Petitioner will install park benches and a fence at the rear of the Property adjacent to the South River. (f) The fuel pumps will be placed 14.5 feet from the front lot line. as previously approved. 5. The Board finds that the new plan submitted with the Petitioner's application is an Overall improvement over the prior plan. This Board finds that the same grounds for the Variance and Special Permit upon which the Prior Decision is based exist with respect to the new plan. On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented at the hearings 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 Ordinance would involve substantial • hardship on the petitioner. 3. The relief requested 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 4. The Special Permit granted can be granted in harmony with the neighborhood and will promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the city's inhabitants. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 5-0, to grant the relief 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 Inspector. 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. A Certificate of Inspection is to be obtained. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF AMERADS HESS CORPORATION REQUESTING A MODIFICATION AND EXTENSION OF A VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 295 DERBY STREET B-5 page four 6. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Planning Board. 7. Petitioner agrees to enter in good faith into discussions with the City on Master Plan of the waterfront, to ensure public access. 8. There shall be no A-frame signs. Special Permit & Variance Granted September 18, 2002 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 • Ko"I i� CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • 11 . SALEM, 01970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR C)- c n - r-c m C—) N NN DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ERNIE DELPERO REQUESTING A oD VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3 DUSTIN STREET R-1 -p -"nrr c)- A hearing on this petition was held October 16, 2002 with the following Board Member�S m y present: Nina Cohen, Joan Boudreau, and Stephen Harris. Nicholas Helides and Jose% Q 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 to construct a 2-car garage for the property located at 3 Dustin Street 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Ernie Delpero is the contractor for the owners of 3 Dustin Street. 2. Petitioner submitted plans showing the proposed garage. 3. A petition was submitted with 10 names in support of this petition. 4. There was no opposition to the plans. • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ERNIE DELPERO REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3 DUSTIN STREET R-1 page two 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 5-0 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. VARIANCE GRANTED OCTOBER 16, 2002 Nicholas Helides W G Board of Appeal 0 ti ti n y a cico C"). ,o0 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ERNIE DELPERO REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3 DUSTIN STREET 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 day 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 o� ti ti r ti A �� clicl) O N7 `O r �Q • vg�co i� CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS ye BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OFCA 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CCERK,S LE-P9, SALEM, MA 01970 S OFFIC f A • gP/fNB TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOMAYOR V ICZ, JR. 10pj APR ,2 P DECISION OF THE PETITION OF PHILIP BEDARD REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 21 EAST COLLINS STREET R-1 A hearing on this petition was held March 20, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Richard Dionne, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belair 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 46A. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from side yard setback to expand the kitchen for the property located at property located at 21 East Collins Street R-1 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. The Petitioner appeared before the Board and presented plans for the proposed renovation. 2. Petitioner would like to expand his kitchen. 3. There was no opposition to the proposed petition. 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. DECISIION ON THE PETITION OF PHILIP BEDARD REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 21 EAST COLLINS STREET R-1 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 5-0, 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. Existing finishes of the new structure shall be in harmony with the existing structure. VARIANCE GRANTED / MARCH 20, 2002 . Bonnie Belair 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 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 • COW CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL L' 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 f STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR C; Ln y N or � DECISION ON THE PETITION OF JOHN CAHILL REQUESTING A VARIANCE FORS n THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 40 ESSEX STREET R-2 O3 N v A hearing on this petition was held on August 21, 2002, with the following Board ,r Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman„ Richard Dionne , Joan Boudreau, Stephen 6 Harris and Bonnie Belair. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and other and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting Variance from lot coverage per dwelling for the property to be used as a three family for the property located at 40 Essex Street R-2. The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding of the Board that: a. Special conditions and circumstances exit which especially affect the land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other lands, buildings or structures in the same district. • b. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner c. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance. The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner is the owner of 40 Essex Street, an older property that in 1964 housed 3 families. In recent years the property was used as a two family and thus lost its grandfathered status as a multifamily dwelling. Petitioner proposes to renovate this property for use as a three family dwelling. He is represented by F.Kelley Landolphi of 70 Washington Street. 2. The existing house is nonconforming as to lot size and front, side and rear setbacks. Petitioner submitted a parking plan incorporating two parking.spaces at the rear of the building and an existing three-car garage to meet the zoning ordinance's off- street parking requirement. 3. Ward Two Councillor Regina Flynn, submitted a letter opposing the plan. She reports that many in the neighborhood oppose the increase in density on grounds • that the additional units are likely to worsen the on street parking problem and because the small size of the building and the proximity to property lines makes • DECISION ON THE PETITION OF JOHN CAHILL REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 40 ESSEX STREET R2 page two three units untenable. Opposition on grounds of density was also raised by Gordon Hayes, a neighbor at 38 Essex Street. Mr. Hayes stated that the proposed plan would not only burden the neighborhood with an overly dense development, would also encourage conversation of other two-families to multi family use. 4. The proposed plan had the support of a neighbor, Marie Breschia of 48 Essex Street Who stated that she was very concerned about increasing parking in the area, but felt the petitioner's parking plan would keep additional cars off the street. On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented at the hearing, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows: 1. Special conditions do not exist which especially affect the subject property and not the district in general. 2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would not result in unnecessary hardship to the petitioner. • 3. The relief requested cannot be granted without substantial detriment to the public good or without nullifying and substantially hardship derogating from the intent of the district or purpose of the Ordinance. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 3 in favor and 2 in opposition to grant the requested variances. Having failed to garner the four affirmative votes required to pass, the motion is defeated and the petition is denied. VARIANCE DENIED AUGUST 21, 2002 Nina Cohen, Chairman Board of Appeal N (7^ r c m C7 XO N T` J C.n V, O L n" Tn N n:' Cn n7 O D • A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK Appeal from this decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of the MGL Chapter 40A and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 11, the Variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the Certification of the City Clerk that 20 days have passed and no appeal has been filed, or that, if such appeal has been filed, that it has been dismissed or denied is recorded in the South Essex Registry of Deeds and indexed under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owners Certificate of Title. Board of Appeal OD N r j a m c MC) N N� J D OI I N n m:X Un D • �owlr CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS P BOARD OF APPEAL W71 0 CLERK zAU H, A 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • ���� ��� SALEM, MA 01970 9�0�HMBfP�[� TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 R92 AUG 29 P !: 41 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR DECISION ON THE PETITION OF RUSSELL KIERMAN REQUESTING AN ADIMISTRATIVE RULING FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 135 ESSEX STREET A hearing on this petition was held on August 21, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chariman, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair and Joan Boudreau. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and others and notices of the hearing were published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. Petitioner is requesting an Administrative Ruling for the review of the Planning Board site plan conditions of the Peabody Essex Museum for the property located at 135 Essex Street. After hearing the evidence the Board of Appeal makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner sought enforcement by the Building Commissioner of the Amended Decision of Site Plan Review dated 10/13/01 (Amended Decision) for 135 Essex Street pursuant to M.S.L. Ch. 40 A, Section 7 According to the petitioner, who is represented by Nicholas J. Decoulos Esq., the Amended decision has not been enforced by the Building Commissioner with respect to paragraph 16, which states: The applicant shall provide free and clear access at all times as shown on the approved plans to the parcel located at 135 Essex Street. The access shall be maintained by the applicant and shall be maintained by the applicant and shall run with the property, not the owner. 2. Petitioner states that at various times the applicant, which is the Peabody Essex Museum, has not maintained free and clear access to petitioner's property. 3. The Peabody Essex Museum did not appear at the ZBA hearing, nor did it submit any documents. The Building Commissioner, Mr. Tom St. Pierre was represented at the hearing by John Keenan, Esq., City Solicitor for the City of Salem. 4. Mr. Keenan stated that Mr. St. Pierre has at all times made reasonable efforts to enforce the provisions of the Amended Decision. Mr. St. Pierre states that the applicant is currently constructing a new addition to the gallery space an on occasion during the construction process a construction or delivery vehicle has blocked access to Mr. Kiernan's property. Mr. Keenan submitted a letter to the petitioner from Mr. St. Pierre dated June 7, 2002, which states, " I feel that the Museum, through the contactor Turner, has made a good faith effort to comply with the Planning Board's site plan condition." DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JOHN KIERNAN FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE ,• RULING FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 135 ESSEX STREET page two 5. Mr. Keenan further commented that it was his understanding that the Amended Decision was intended to effect conditions during construction of the new addition. 6. Mr. George Ahmed of Salem spoke at the hearing on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. Ahmed stated that, in future, the Museum could allocate security personnel to limit public access to Mr. Kierman;s property during Museum events. Mr. Stephen Harris of Salem noted that a security fence across the petitioner's driveway is shown on the approved plans, although such a fence has not been erected as of this point on the property. Therefore, based on the fact and on evidence presented, Ms. Cohen made a motion for the Board to support John Keenan's opinion and stand behind the Building Inspector with regards to the Peabody Essex Museum with a vote of 4-0 to deny the petitioners appeal. Nina Cohen CScr� 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 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 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. o C)= c M� N V>U r. Cr T V -T1 S • - t7• m� n �o CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEt•1, MA 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • fig SALEM, MA 01970 CLERK'S OFFICE y, TEL. (978) 745-9595 "�✓MM�ixNaa FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEYJ. ,1 VICZ, R. O 2002 MAY 22 A 9V 58 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF RAYMOND HARVEY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 84 FLINT STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held May 15, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Richard Dionne, Joan Boudreau, Bonnie Belair 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. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from lot coverage and side setback to allow construction of a.patio enclosure over existing deck for the property located at 84 Flint Street located in an R-2 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Raymond Harvey appeared and represented himself at the hearing. 2. Plans were submitted showing the patio enclosure. 3. There was no opposition to the proposed plans. • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF RAYMOND HARVEY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 22 WEST AVENUE R-1 page two 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 5-0 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. VARIANCE GRANTED MAY 15, 2002 Stephen Harris 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 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 • • eco ttb CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL r1, 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR (,I f JI �Mt...i'i. f'iH SALEM, MA 01970 CLERK'S OFFICE • �s TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740.9846 STANLEY MAYOR AYSROVICZ, .1 R. O 7002 JUL 19 A 11: 30 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF Z & M REALTY TRUST REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 36 FOREST AVENUE B4/R2 A hearing on this petition was held July 17, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Joan Boudreau, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair 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. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from density and height requirements to construct a five- unit dwelling for the property located at 36 Forest Avenue located in a B4-R2 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1.Petitioners own three adjoining properties at the intersection of Canal Street and Forest Avenue. Petitioner operates a business, Bagel World, on the property with frontage on Canal Street. An adjacent lot with frontage on Forest Avenue is used as a parking lot, and a third lot, with frontage on Heresy Street is unused. 2. While the Bagel World property lays within the B-4 zoning district, the other two properties (the lots) lie partly within the B-4 district and partly within the R-2 district. Petitioner wishes to improve the lot by constructing a five- unit residential dwelling thereon, which may be entered from either the Hersey St. or the Forest Ave sides. Petitioner seeks a variance to allow a multifamily use in the R-2 district, and a variance to allow a total of 5400 square feet per dwelling unit where the ordinance • required 7500 square feet per unit. Petitioner also seeks a variance to allow a three story building where the ordinance limits construction to 2 Y2 stories. DECISION OF THE PETITION OF Z & M REALTY TRUST REQUESTING A • VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 36 FOREST AVENUE page two 3. Previously, petitioners sought variances to allow six dwellings units on the three lots, and in March 2002 they were denied the variances they sought. Subsequently, the Planning Board for the City of Salem decided by a vote of Ito 1, that the present plan constitutes a material and substantial change from the earlier plan. The Salem Planning Board decision is dated June 6, 2002 and is incorporated by reference herein. Given the Planning Board's determination, the Zoning Board of Appeal agrees that the petition may properly be heard by us tonight. 4. Petitioner's representative Henry Lucas, Esq. asserted that all parking requirements of of the ordinance will be met by the proposed development. There are garages for each of the two units on Hersey St. and each will also have one off street parking space in a driveway. Each of the three units facing Forest Ave will have on off street parking garage, and each of the three units will have a dedicated parking space in a parking array to be painted on the existing lot. Remaining parking spaces in the Forest Ave lot will be available for the use of Bagel World customers under the terms of an easement granted by the Realty Trust. The business owners will retain responsibility for upkeep of the parking lot and for snow removal 5. Stanley Bornstein, Director of Public Works for the City of Salem spoke in support of the proposed development. It was his testimony that flooding is unlikely to occur on • the properties where the residential units are to be built. He spoke on behalf of Stanley Usovicz, Mayor of Salem, who wishes to support the proposed development. Ronald Dumis who is an abutter, also appeared in support of the petition and Mr. Lucas submitted a petition signed by about 10 neighbors who supported the development of the property. 6. There was no opposition to the proposed petition. 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 5-0 to grant the Variances requested, subject to the following conditions; • 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statutes, ordinances, codes and regulations. DECISION OF THE PETITION OF Z & M REALTY TRUST REQUESTING A • VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 36 FOREST AVENUE page three 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. Petitioner is to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy. 6. Petitioner shall obtain proper street numbering from the City of Salem Assessors office ad 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 jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Planning Board. 8. Petitioner is to draft easement plan and submit to Board VARIANCE GRANTED July 17, 2002 n / � cgch. . 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 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 • CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS . BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEM, MA 2 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE • `•A ��a SALEM, MA 01970 •^^• TEL. (978) 745-9595 9rve FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. YOR USOVICZ, JR. 1001 APR -Z pMA DECISION ON THE PETITION OF Z & M REALTY TRUST REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 36 FOREST AVENUE B4/R2 A hearing on this petition was held on March 20, 2002, with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Bonnie Belair, Richard Dionne and Stephen Harris. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and other and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting Variances from Section 5-2(b) and 5-2(f) and density regulations of Article IV of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the construction'and use of the premises as a six (6) unit dwelling for the property located at 36 Forest Avenue in a 64- R2 zone. The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding of the Board that: a. Special conditions and circumstances exit which especially affect the land, building • or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other lands, buildings or structures in the same district. b. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner c. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance. The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner seeks variances from density and use regulation to allow construction on this lot of a six unit dwelling, with on site parking for 10 cars. The lot straddles the district line between the B-4 (wholesale and automotive) and R-2 (two family residential) districts. 2. Petitioner's proposed plan would comply with all dimensional requirements of the R-3 Multifamily district. 3. Petitioner's proposed plan would comply with parking requirements for multifamily dwellings. Each attached unit would include a one- car garage. Two additional off street parking places would be created adjacent to the building, and four dedicated • parking places would be marked in a lot owned by an adjacent business, Bagel World, and would be held by the proposed development in the form of a perpetual • DECISION ON THE PETITION OF Z & M REALTY TRUST REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 36 FOREST AVENUE B-4/R-2 pagetwo easement for plowing and maintenance of the parking lot by the Bagel World business and its successors in title. 4. Petitioner, through his Attorney Henry Lucas, argued that the limited business visibility on Canal Street constituted a financial hardship to the lot owner. The Board of Appeal did not accept this argument. No other argument was made to show hardship that would accrue to the property owner. 5. Several neighbors spoke in support to the proposed project, on the grounds that they preferred a multifamily residential use to the zoned business use. There were Roland Dumaile, 34 Forest Avenue, Michael Ratigan, 30 Forest Avenue, and Ed Carter, 28 Forest Avenue. One neighbor, Dom Ortins of 24 Forest Ave, spoke in opposition to the density of the proposed project. On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented at the hearing, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows: 1. Special conditions do not exist which especially affect the subject property and not the district in general. • 2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would not result in unnecessary hardship to the petitioner. 3. The relief requested cannot be granted without substantial detriment to the public good or without nullifying and substantially hardship derogating from the intent of the district or purpose of the Ordinance. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 3 in favor and 1 in opposition to grant the requested variances. Having failed to garner the four affirmative votes required to pass, the motion is defeated and the petition is denied. VARIANCE DENIED MARCH 20, 2002 n 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 MGL Chapter 40A and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 11, the Variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the Certification of the City Clerk that 20 days have passed and no appeal has been filed, or that, if such appeal has been filed, that it has been dismissed or denied is recorded in the South Essex Registry of Deeds and indexed under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owners Certificate of Title. Board of Appeal -007 11 -0 CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS CI 3BOARD OF APPEAL 17� SAL 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLL ERA'S C FICA • �c' SALEM, MA O 1970 E TEL. (978) 745-9595 STANLEYFAX (978) 740-9846 '•10019 VZ, JR. OCTQCT 23 P MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF GEORGE HOXHA REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 151-153 FORT AVENUE R-1 A hearing on this petition was held October 16, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Joan Boudreau, Stephen Harris, 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 for lot area, lot width, lot coverage, side, front and rear setbacks to subdivide his property located at 151-153 Fort Avenue 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner seeks variances from lot area, lot width, lot coverage and from the setback requirements in order to subdivide his property at 151-153 Fort Ave. in the Salem Willows section of Salem. 2. Petitioner's property consists of two existing nonconforming buildings on a lot that merged by operation of law in a previous ownership. One of the buildings is in residential use; in the other petitioner operates a store selling drinks and snack. Subdivision would allow petitioner to sell on of the properties as a separate lot for use as a single-family residence. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF GEORGE HOXHA REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 151-153 FORT AVENUE R-1 page two 3. Petitioner brought a 1915 map showing a lot layout for his and the surrounding lots in which the two properties were initially separate lots. The board surmised the early layout showed small lots designed for summer cottages in the seaside park area. Now winterized for year-round use, petitioner's residential property is not out of keeping with the character of the neighborhood although it does not meat the zoning code's current lot size requirements. 4. Thee was no opposition to the proposed variance. 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 5-0 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 requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 3. Petitioner shall obtain proper street numbering for the City of Salem Assessors Office and shall display said number so as to be visible from the street. 4 Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction . including, but not limited to the Planning Board. VARIANCE GRANTED / �/.�� ��"C J • c� OCTOBER 16, 2002 Nina Cohen, Chairman ti c-)= • Board of Appeal � N W vice D �m N �3 D 0 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF GEORGE HOXHA REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 151-153 FORT AVENUE 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 day 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 N n O n'� rn n C-1 �T • N Cn C:)W o➢ Tr � Tn .3 N rn 3 zr D • CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OESALW NA 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK,S)UFME SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745.9595 FAX (978) 740.9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. i.(PI-XC;31 PA^.91a.Rb , MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF PAUL CAISSE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5 FRIEND STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held December 18, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, Stephen Harris, Nicholas Helides and Bonnie Bel air. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and others and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening New in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from side setback, rear setback, and lot coverage to construct a 24' x 24' addition for the property located at 5 Friend. Street located in an R-2 zone. The Variances, which have been requested, upon a finding 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 this 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. Petitioner and his architect David Jaquith of Beverly appeared and presented his petition. 2. Plans were shown showing the proposed 24 x 24 addition to his property. The addition will require a variance from the side setback, rear setback and lot coverage. 3. Councillor Michael Bencal spoke in favor of the addition. 4. There was no opposition. • CITY OF SALEt�(...MA CLERK'S OFFICE' DECISION OF THE PETITION OF PAUL CAISSE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5 FRIEND STREET R-2 .10010EG 3 I A 1 4b page two "� ' _' On the basis of the above finding of fact, 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 petition. 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 5-0, to grant the Variances requested, subject to the following conditions; 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statures, ordinances, codes and regulations. 2. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 3. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction 4. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimension submitted and approved approved by the Building Commissioner. 5. Exterior finishes of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing structure. Variance Granted December 18, 2002 Nina Cohen Board of Appeal • .�o CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEM ! y, 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE A SALEM, MA 01970 • TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 1001 MAR 21 P 21 MAYOR DECISION ON THE PETITION OF FATIMA & BRIAN HEATH REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3 HAWTHORNE BLVD R-2 A hearing on this petition was held on March 20, 2002, with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Bonnie Belair, Richard Dionne, Nicholas Helides and Stephen Harris. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and other and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting Variances from parking and use to utilize the first floor for an upscale teahouse and gift shop for the property located at 3 Hawthorne Blvd located in an R-2 zone. The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding of the Board that: a. Special conditions and circumstances exit which especially affect the land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other lands, buildings or structures in the same district. • b. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner c. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance. The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioners presented the detail of the intended use as an "upscale tea house and gift shop", including menu. 2. Petitioners presented their background in the food business. 3. Petitioners asserted that the prior use of the space before their purchase of the property as office space. 4. Parking for patrons of the business will be on street. 5. There was no opposition to the request. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF FATIMA & BRIAN HEATH REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3 HAWTHORNE BLVD R-2 page two On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented at the hearing, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows: 1. Special conditions do not exist which especially affect the subject property and not the district in general. 2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would not result in unnecessary hardship to the petitioner. 3. The relief requested cannot be granted without substantial detriment to the public good or without nullifying and substantially hardship derogating from the intent of the district or purpose of the Ordinance. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 3 in favor and 2 in opposition to grant the requested variances. Having failed to garner the four affirmative votes required to pass, the motion is defeated and the petition is denied. VARIANCE DENIED MARCH 20, 2002 Nicholas Helides 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 MGL Chapter 40A and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 11, the Variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the Certification of the City Clerk that 20 days have passed and no appeal has been filed, or that, if such appeal has been filed, that it has been dismissed or denied is recorded in the South Essex Registry of Deeds and indexed under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owners Certificate of Title. • Board of Appeal v��co T CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL n 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CITY OF SALEM, FSA �j 'Y�t X SALEM, MA 01970 CLERK'S OFFICE • .. TEL. (978) 745-9595 eAnmaW� FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR 1001 DEC -U P 3: 01 DECISION ON THE PETITION OF KURT BALLOU REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3 HIGH STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held on November 20, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Nicholas Helides, Stephen Harris, 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. Petitioner requests a Special Permit to allow a change of the current non-conforming use of the building as a bakery to the use as a music recording studio on the 1"floor and 1 residential unit on the 2ntl floor for the property located at 3 High Street located in a R-2 zone. The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance Which is applicable to this request for a Special Permit is section 5-3 (2) (8), which provides as follows: • Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing in this Or the Board of Appeal may, in accordance with the procedure and conditions set forth in Section 8-6 and 9-4, grant Special Permits for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming structures, and for changes, enlargement, extension of expansion, of nonconforming lots, land, structures, and uses, provided however, that such change, extension, enlargement of 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. A. Special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect the land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other lands, buildings or stuctures in the same district. B. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve Substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner. C. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and Without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the ordinance. The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented, and • after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: CITY OF SALEM. MA • CLERK'S OFFICE DECISION ON THE PETITION OF KURT BALLOU REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3 HIGH STREET R-2 page two 1001 DEC -U P 3: 08 1. Attorney George W. Atkins III, 59 Federal Street represented the petitioner, Kurt Ballou. 2. Mr. Ballou intends to live in the second floor residential unit and operate a music recording business on the first floor. 3. To accommodate the music recording business, Mr. Ballou will install soundproofing material to create a soundproof recording room and control room, and a reception area. Recording sessions will be held by appointment for client musicians. 4. Petitioner presented noise Ireadings to determine the amount of ambient noise entering from the street, and he stated that he would, so as to limit sound from entering the recording room from the exterior of the building and conversely, to limit sound from existing from the recording room to the exterior of the building. 5. There is no parking on the site. Off street parking is available on Margin Street and public parking facility is located across Margin Street from the building. • 6. Petitioner sponsored a meeting for abutters and others prior to the hearing, and no one spoke in opposition to the petition. 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. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would involve substantial hardship on the petitioner. 2. The relief requested 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. 3. The Special Permit granted can be granted in harmony with the neighborhood and will promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 5 in favor and 0 in opposition, to grant the relief requested, subject to the following conditions: 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statues, codes ordinances and . regulations. 2. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained. • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF KURT BALLOU REQUESTING A SPECIALCITY OF SALEM. MA PERMIT FOR THE PROPERY LOCATED AT 3 HIGH STREET R-2 CLERK'S OFFICE page three 3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safetyO��lL i DEC -4 P 3 Oq be strictly adhered to. ! 4. A Certificate of Inspection shall be obtained. 5. All construction shall be done as per plans and dimension submitted and approved by the Building Commissioner. 6. Petitioner shall be obtained a building permit before starting any construction. 7. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained. SPECIAL PERMIT GRANTED NOVEMBER 20, 2002 Nina Cohen, Chairman Board of Appeals • A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK Appeal from this decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17, of MGL Chapter 40A, and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 11, the Variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision, bearing the certification of the City Clerk that the 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. • v��toxn CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF ,SALEM, MA n. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE .f SALEM, MA 01970 9 ' i TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. 2002 MAY I I A 10: 48 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF MICHAEL MCLAUGHLIN REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 42-44 HIGHLAND AVENUE R-2 A hearing on this petition was held Mayt5, 2002 the following Board Members were present: Nina Cohen Chairman, Stephen Harris, Bonnie Belair, 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 the Salem Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant leave to withdraw this petition without prejudice for Variance from parking and change of use to allow for a mortgage company on the 151 floor, which is currently a dwelling unit for the property located at 42-22 Highland Avenue R-2. • GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE MAY 15, 2002 �J 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 .co CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEM, MA 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE • 1 s� SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY MJ. LISAYOVICZ, JR. 1001 MAY -3 p 3_ I4 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF MICHAEL MCLAUGHLIN REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 42-44 HIGHLAND AVENUE R-2 A hearing on this petition was held April 24, 2002 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 the Salem Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant leave to withdraw this petition without prejudice for Variance from parking and change of use to allow for a mortgage company on the 1"floor, which is currently a dwelling unit for the property located at 42-22 Highland Avenue R-2. • GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE. APRIL 24, 2002 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 v�'coxwr,� CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MA 01970 C��R. • s�C TEL. (978) 745-9595 �0 FAx (978) 740-9846 0,4- STANLEY AVICZ, JR. MAYOR S DECISION ON THE PETITION OF EMILY MORGAN REQUESTING A VARIANCE /0. FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 103 HIGHLAND AVENUE R-1 0<> A hearing on this petition was held on September 18, 2002, with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Stephen Harris, Joseph Barbeau and Bonnie Belair. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and other and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting Variances from lot size to construct a single family dwelling for the property located at 103 Highland Avenue located in an R-1 zone. The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding of the Board that: a. Special conditions and circumstances exit which especially affect the land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other lands, buildings or structures in the same district. • b. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner c. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance. The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner is a prospective buyer who has entered a purchase and sale agreement with the owner of a lot at 103 Highland Avenue with the intention of building a single family home on the lot. 2. The lot in question is 4,950 square feet in area. It does not meet the zoning Ordinance's 15, 000 square foot requirement for single-family homes. It is not a grandfathered lot because it falls below the square footage required for single-family homes at the time this ordinance was enacted. Petitioner was aware that the lot did not meet the zoning requirements when she entered the purchase and sale agreement. 3. Several neighbors opposed the petition. Mr. & Mrs. Jon Lunt, abutters at 6 Greenway Road, delivered a letter describing previous dealings with the property owner, who built a home on the site despite having been denied a variance several • years ago. The foundation of the earlier home was removed at the expense • DECISION ON THE PETITION OF EMILY MORGAN REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED A 103 HIGHLAND AVENUE R-1 page two of the City of Salem. Stan Poirier of 8 Cottage Street described flooding problems that was worsened by the owner's dumping fill on this property. He indicated that the fill brought by the owner covered a storm drain installed by Mass Highway Engineers. 4. There was no showing of hardship with respect to the proposed variance. On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented at the hearing, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows: 1. Special conditions do not exist which especially affect the subject property and not the district in general. 2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would not result in unnecessary hardship to the petitioner. 3. The relief requested cannot be granted without substantial detriment to the public good or without nullifying and substantially hardship derogating from the intent of the district or purpose of the Ordinance. • Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 0 in favor and 4 in opposition to grant the requested variances. Having failed to garner the four affirmative votes required to pass, the motion is defeated and the petition is denied. VARIANCE DENIED SEPTEMBER 18, 2002 Nina Cohen,Chairman Board of Appeal N r- ; cn M, n 7 -O N CJ�L cn or . o rn , o Y' N • A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK Appeal from this decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of the MGL Chapter 40A and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 11, the Variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the Certification of the City Clerk that 20 days have passed and no appeal has been filed, or that, if such appeal has been filed, that it has been dismissed or denied is recorded in the South Essex Registry of Deeds and indexed under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owners Certificate of Title. Board of Appeal • N nJ r4 � m r'• �c v x. O' NJ • v���oxn CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALLM, MA 3 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE Q SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 1001 OCT 29 A 9: 58 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ROBERT JELLISON REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6 HOME STREET R-C A hearing on this petition was held October 16, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Joan Boudreau, Stephen Harris, 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 and rear setback to construct a 2nd store addition for the property located at 6 Home Street located in an R-C 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner, Robert Jellison seeks variances from front and rear setbacks to construct a 2nd story addition. 2. Councillor at Large Kevin Harvey appeared and spoke in support of the petition. 3. A petition was submitted with 11 names in favor of the proposed plans. 4. The relief requested is a front setback of 9 feet 6 inches instead of the required 40 feet and a rear setback of 23 feet 6 inches instead of 100 feet. DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ROBERT JELLISON REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6 HOME STREET R-C page two 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 5-0 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 plans and dimension 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. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained. VARIANCE GRANTED OCTOBER 16, 2002 GC/J Stephen arns CS'Cr'� Board of Appeal • A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CIITY 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 day 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 • i CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS CICLERY, �' •--� BOARD OF APPEAL S OFFICE R 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • ���`` �o' SALEM, MA 01970 sem""" • TEL. (978) 745-9595 1001 JUL _ 2 A STANLEY J. .USOVICZ, JR. Fax (978) 740-9846 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JOHN HINCH REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 19 IRVING STREET 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 to allow the construction of a free standing 2 -car garage for the property located at 19 Irving Street located in an R-2 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner is seeking relief of a front yard setback to construct a 2-car garage. 2. John C011icige of S Irving Street appeared and spoke in favor of the petition. 3. Though there was no opposition fro abutters, there was some concern from the Board that this structure would be to close to the street to allow for the safe egress of vehicles, thus causing a health and safety issue. 4. The proposed structure could be moved further back on the property without effecting the rear setback requirements, and without undue hardship to the petitioner. • 5. The front Yard setback will be 10 feet instead of the required 15 feet. DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JOHN HINCH REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 19 IRVING STREET 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. VARIANCE GRANTED June 19, 2002 _ /I Cr seph Barboe S' 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 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 • • voxel CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL 3 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CIT S OFFICE SALEM, MA 01970 CLERK' • � ' TEL. (978) 745-9595 �a FAx (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR 102 DEC DECISION OF THE PETITION OF CHARLES & RAYMOND JEFFREY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 65 JEFFERSON AVENUE URC A hearing on this petition was held November 20, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, Stephen Harris, Nicholas Helides 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 New in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from the off-street parking requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for the property located at 65 Jefferson Avenue located in an URC zone. The Variances, which have been requested, upon a finding 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 this 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. Attorney Scott Grover of Essex Street in Salem represented the petitioners Jeffery Brothers Furniture, a retail store and warehouse that seeks to operate its business in a former furniture store at 65 Jefferson Avenue. 2. Petitioner seeks a variance from the parking requirements of the ordinance on the grounds that the needs of the business would be met by the off street parking provided by the existing lot, which as capacity for 58 cars and two loading docks. 3. Petitioner submitted plans for traffic flow on the site. At intervals, petitioner will park delivery trucks in an indicated area within the lot, while their cargo awaits • CITY OF SALEM. MA • DECISION OF THE PETITION CHARLES &RAYMOND JEFFREY REQUESTINOI_ERK'• OFFICE A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 65 JEFFERSON AVENUE URC page two unloading when not used for this purpose, such spaces will be available for customeiRs@EC —U P 3: 08', in addition to the 58 spaces provided. 4. There was no opposition to the proposed variance. On the basis of the above finding of fact, 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 petition. 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 5-0, to grant the Variances requested, subject to the following conditions; 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statures, ordinances, codes and regulations. 2. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 3. Petitioner shall obtain a Certificate of Inspection. 4. Petitioner shall obtain proper street numbering from the City of Salem Assessors Office and shall display said numbers 5. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction 6. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimension submitted and approved approved by the Building Commissioner. 7. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the planning Board. • CITY OF SALEM MA DECISION OI y911 PETITION Ol CI IARI.I S & RAYMOND Jh;I"PRI:1 CLERK'S OFFICE 10 REQUESTING A VARIANCE POR I'Hl: PROPERTY I„OCA` C-'I) AT 05 JEFFERSON AV13NUE page three 1601 DEC —4 P 108 8. Variancc rc(Illosied is for the use 01' l 11 is busincss only and shall explrc if properly is subdividc(I„ Variance Granlcd November 20, 2001 Nina Cohen, Chairmim Board of Appcal A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CIITY 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 day 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 • co CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS•I I' + ur.' SALEN, MA BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE g) 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MA O 1970 • TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 HOZ AUG 30 A IIS 10 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF STEPHEN LIVERMORE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16-18 JUNIPER AVENUE R1 A hearing on this petition was held August 21, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Joan Boudreau, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair 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. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from front setback, left side setback, building height and lot coverage requirements to construct an for the property located at 16-18 Juniper Avenue R-1 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1.The petitioner appeared and represented himself at the hearing 2. Plans were submitted showing the proposed addition to be constructed. The variance for front setback of 7'6" instead of the required 15',a left setback of 7' instead of the required 10'. Also a request for a variance to use three floors as living space to construct a shed dormer and mansard style dormers to the property at 16-18 Juniper. 3. Abutters spoke in favor of the petition stating the present us of the property enhances the neighborhood and climates the problems that previously existed. • 4. There was no opposition to the plans. CITY Jr SALE,1. MA CLERKIsOFFICE 102 AUG30 All: 10 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF STEPHEN LIVERMORE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16-18 JUNIPER AVENUE R-1 page two 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 5-0 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. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained. VARIANCE GRANTED August 21, 2002 Stephen Harris �f✓Cv�(�' Board of Appeal • CIT Or SAI-Ed. MA CLERK'S OFFICE 207 AUG 30 A Ii: I I DECISION OF THE PETITION OF STEPHEN LIVERMORE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16-18 JUNIPER AVENUE 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 day 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 • (,oNU111r CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS b�. ^ CITY OF OF CLERK'S MA BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • SALEM, MA 01970 7�✓'�ti=- TEL. (978) 745-9595 gBClry�ryg rA� FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. .1003 JAN -2 P 3: 5b MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ENGINE HOUSE PLAZA REALTY TRUST REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 51-71 LAFAYETTE STREET B-5 A hearing on this petition was held December 18, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, Stephen Harris, and Bonnie Belair Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and others and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening New in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from Table 3 of B-5 density regulation uses from the following; maximum lot are per dwelling unit, maximum height of buildings and floor area ratio to add 2 additional stories and residential uses for the property located at 51-71 Lafayette Street located in an B-5 zone. The Variances, which have been requested, upon a finding 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 this 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. Petitioner is a Real Estate Trust, One Engine House Plaza Realty Trust, whose trustees are Michael J. O;Brian, David Walsh and Philip Hansbury. Petitioner's plans to redevelop for mixed retail and residential use for the property at 51-71 Lafayette St. known as the Salem Laundry Building. Attorney Scott Grover of 222 Essex represented the petitioners. 2. A recent analysis by Structures North Engineering uncovered an array or structural problems with the tum of the century property, including inadequacies of the roof, • supporting members and the Lafayette St. fagade. The cost of reconstructing the building will be considerable, potentially exceeding one million dollars. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ENGINE HOUSE PLAZA REALTY TRUST REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 51-71 LAFAYETTE STREET B-5 page two To recover reconstruction costs, the owners plan to convert the building to residential use and create 55 condominium units. 3. Petitioners plan to add two stories, to a total building height of 78 feet. Retail use on The first floor will be retained. Parking for the owners of the condo units will be at the City of Salem's South Harbor Garage because there is no on-site parking. The project will retain the existing footprint and will preserve elements of the original design in a reconstructed core. 4. Since the Salem Laundry building does not meet density regulations for new construction, the petitioners are seeking variances from minimum lot area per dwelling unit to allow 379 square foot per unit, floor area ratio for a ratio of 5.54.1 and building height for a total height of 78 feet. As support for their request, petitioners argue that a literal enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would be detrimental not just to the owners but to the City of Salem,because it would preclude the restoration and reuse of the historic property. • 5. Petitioners will seek approval of the redevelopment plan from the Salem Redevelopment Authority and the Design Review Board, from the Planning Board and from the Conservation Commissioner. They have support for their plan from Claudia Chuber, Ward 1 Councillor, Joan Lovely, Ward 3 Councillor, Joan Kantor and Nick Helides, condomimin owners at 20 Central Street and from Salem Main Street executive director Deborah Griel. Conditional support for the project was voiced by Staley McDermet architect and former member of the Salem Redevelopment Authority, who suggested that approval of the variances should be contingent upon the preservation of the existing massing, masonry and concrete exterior wall surfaces, and detailing on the brick portion of the building. On the basis of the above finding of fact, 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 petition. 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. DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ENGINE HOUSE PLAZA REALTY TRUST • REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 51-71 LAFAYETTE STREET B-5 page three Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant the Variances requested, subject to the following conditions; 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statures, 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. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained. 6. Petitioner shall obtain approval from all City Boards or Commission having • jurisdictions including, but not limited to, the Planning Board. 7. Petitioner shall obtain a yearly parking permit within 1,000 feet and renew them on a yearly basis for the condo owners. Variance Granted December 18, 2002 Ni/ �cc � Board of Appeal • A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CIITY 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 day 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 • I • X,oNDI,k CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL n! °' 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CITY OF SALEM MA SALEM, MA 01970 CLERK'S OFFICE . -.�"'' TEL. (978) 745-9595 e11,1 ' FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. • MAYOR 1001 DEC -4 P 3: 05 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF BEVERLY CO-OPERATIVE BANK REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 73-85 LAFAYETTE STREET B-2 A hearing on this petition was held November 20, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Joan Boudreau, Stephen Harris, Nicholas Helides and Richard Dionne. 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 to permit use of the building and abutting land as a drive-thru banking facility for the property located at 73-85 Lafayette Street located in an B-2 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Attorney George Aktins III, 59 Federal Street, Salem represented the petitioner Beverly Co-Operative Bank, 254 Cabot Street, Beverly. 2. Petitioner is the owner of three parcels of land and existing buildings at 73-85 Lafayette Street, that formly housed an auto dealership and most recently a restaurant and seasonal entertainment business. Petitioner proposes to renovate its buildings for use as a full service bank and to add a drive-through banking facility to the buildings rear, which would exit onto Derby Street. It seeks variances for the drive-through use. . • CITY OF SALEM. MA DECISION OF THE PETITION OF BEVERLY CO-OPERATIVE BANK REQUE -UU K'S OFFICE VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 73-85 LAFAYETTE STREET page two 2002 DEC -4 P 3.' Oq 3. Petitioners plan requires approval of the City of Salem Redevelopment Authority as well as state agencies with authority over waterfront redevelopment pursuant to Chapter 91 a. Petitioner has also petitioned the City of Salem and the abutting owner Mass Electric, for easements to enable cars to pass over adjacent lands to facilitate the drive-through lane. 4. Alterations to the existing footprint are submitted only in connection with the Planned drive-through lanes. Petitioners will retain and undertake renovations to the existing buildings, which comply with the dimensional requirements of the Zoning Ordinance per the B-5 district. 5. In support of its application for a drive-through facility, Petitioner presented evidence of the difficulty of the site. It is the locus for very high voltage underground electric cable, which limits digging and construction of additional foundation and it abuts the waterfront. 6. The City of Salem which supports the project, plans to create a waterfront walkway with public access along the South River pursuant to the Salem Harbor Plan, and in accordance of their plan, petitioner will provide limited public access through its building. Petitioner will also construct and maintain a community • room in the Lafayette Street building, which may be utilized by community groups at no cost. 7. There was no opposition to the variance. 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 5-0 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 plans and dimension submitted and approved • by the Building Commissioner. CCItY OF SALEM- MA DECISION OF THE PETITION OF BEVERLY CO-OPERATIVE BANK REQUESTCLyNp 4 S OFFICE VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 73-85 LAFAYETTE STREET B-5 page three 3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safes al-U P 3: 09 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. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained. 7. Petitioner shall obtain proper street numbering from the City of Salem Assessors Office and shall display said numbering to be visible from the street. 8. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Planning Board. 9. All construction of the drive through structure shall be done in accordance with the Plans submitted. Remaining improvements to the site shall be constructed in accordance with approval by other municipal and state boards and agencies. GRANTEDVARIANCE NOVEMBER 0, 2002 ✓ �yL'�j�" " -�` �SC�� • Nina Cohen, Chairman Board of Appeal A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CIITY 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 day 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 o CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CITY OF SA ! SALEM, MA 01970 CLERK S 0 F1 N TEL. (978) 745.9595 SCE FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. YOR VICZ, JR. lOOI JAN 28 P 12: 0 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF WILLIAM CAULEY JR. REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 20 LATHROP STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held January 16, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Richard Dionne, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belair 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. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from density and side yard setback to allow an addition for the property located at 20 Lathrop Street located in a R-2 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner and his builders Michael Jones and Matt Huckins appeared and presented their plan to extend the right rear wall of the existing building by approximately four feet to allow more interior living space. The proposed addition would be within one fort at the side property line and therefore requires a side yard variance. 2. The existing property is currently nonconforming as to lot coverage, and the proposed addition would increase the nonconformity in that regard. 3. There was no opposition to the proposed petition. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF WILLIAM CAULEY JR. REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 20 LATHROP STREET R-2 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 5-0, to grant the Variances requested, subject to the following conditions; • 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statures, ordinances, codes and regulations. 2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted. 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. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained. 6. Exterior finishes of the new construction shall be in harmony with existing structure. VARIANCE GRANTED JANUARY 16, 2002 r(4-1 � Nina Cohen Chairman, Board of Appeals DECISION OF THE PETITION OF WILLIAM CAULEY JR. REQUESTING A VARIANCE " FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 20 LATHROP STREET R-2 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 •.,..,-.. .. .. 0 11 . •.. ... ...- . . �t'.. _ C/T Y Of- SA CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS C(f y I. pp.. y�- m3L c BOARD OF APPEAL RII ,S O F�C'!� 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MA 01970 FAX (978) 740-9846 10D y ', �4mNe 11fA STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. A 10'. 0 O8 MAYOR DECISION ON THE PETITION OF WILLIAM ARNOLD REQUESTING AN ADIMISTRATIVE RULING FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 10 LINDEN STREET A hearing on this petition was held on April 24, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chariman, Richard Dionne, Stephen Harris, Nicholas Halides and Joan Boudreau. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and others and notices of the hearing were published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. Petitioner is requesting an Administrative Ruling for the extension of a non-conforming structure for the property located at 10 Linden Street. After hearing the evidence the Board of Appeal makes the following findings of fact: • 1.. Petitioner, William Arnold owns and occupies a three-family residence at 10 Linden Street in Salem, in a two-family zoning district. His property is non-conforming both as to use and as to side and rear setback requirements, lot size and lot area per dwelling unit. 2. Recently, Mr. Arnold applied for a building permit to construct an addition, which he intends to use as a garage and living area for the existing units. The proposed addition would extend the footprint of the existing building within the current setback, density and parking requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The Building Commissioner granted Mr. Arnold's application for a building permit, and he began construction, completing work on the foundation. 4. Subsequently, the Building Commissioner issued a stop work order and informed Mr. Arnold that before any work could proceed on the proposed addition, he must obtain a special permit from the Salem Zoning Board of Appeal. The Building Commissioner based his order upon an opinion issued by the City Solicitor for the City of Salem, dated March 28, 2002, a copy of which is attached to this decision and is incorporated by reference within it. 5. The issued before the Board of Appeal is whether the Building Commissioner acted correctly in ordering Mr. Arnold to stop work on the proposed addition, pending a determination by the ZBA that a special permit may issued? C�►F �SALEM, MA • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF WILLIAM ARNOLD FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE S OFFICE RULING FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 10 LINDEN STREET page two 1001 6. Section 9-3 of the Salem Zoning Ordinance gives the powers and duties of th�44�oalld,4 to.. 08 of Appeal. In subsection (e), the Ordinances provides for the issuance of decisions on administrative appeals: (e) The concurring vote of four (4) of the members of the Board of Appeals shall be necessary to reverse any order or decision of the Inspector of Buildings or to decide in favor of the applicant on any matter upon which it is required to pass under this ordinance or to effect any variation in the application of this ordinance. 7. The Board of Appeal heard testimony from Mr. Arnold, who opposed the issuance of The stop work order, and from Councillor Kimberly Driscoll, Ward 4, who argued in favor of the statutory interpretation set forth in the opinion of the City Solicitor. Where a nonconforming structure and multifamily use exist in a residential neighborhood, Ms. Driscoll urged the board to adopt the rule that a petitioner must obtain a Special Permit before making any alteration to the structure or the use. 8. The Board of Appeal also heard from an abutter, David Guy of 7 Linden Street, supporting the foregoing comments, arguing that the Board of Appeal should obtain input form the neighborhood prior to approving any change to an existing nonconforming use and structure. • Therefore, based on the fact and on evidence presented, Ms. Cohen made a motion for a Stop Work Order and support John Keenan's opinion and voted 5-0 in favor of Mr. Arnold returning to the Board of Appeal with an application for lief. 00�, W,tLL5� ho- Nina Cohen 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 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 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. l� co CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC PROPERTY DEPARTMENT 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CITY OF C SALEM, MA 0 970 ' TEL. (978) 745-9595 EXT. 380 CIERK�S OFFICE A • FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. PETER STROUT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROPERTY MAYOR Z�OI FIAY - q 10' 0 March 28, 2002 William Arnold 10 Linden Street Salem, Ma. 01970 Dear Mr. Arnold: Due to conflicting opinions between the City Solicitor and my zoning opinion,I am requesting the Board of Appeal to conduct an Administrative Ruling. The issue being considered is the extension of your non-conforming structure. • The cost of this administrative ruling will be covered by this office. Untilyourcase is heard, there are no building permits, other than your foundation permit and therefore no work should be started. If further information is needed, please contact this office. Since Peter Strout Zoning Enforcement Officer .cc: Mayors Office Councillor Driscoll John Keenan Attorney McArdle 0 �oxmri� CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS , , BOARD OF APPEAL CLEF, I I���`S Oi7i- .,q 3 E. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR 'ICt a11 �t m SALEM, MA 01970 • ��s `•' TEL. (978).745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 1001 SEP 25 A 10. 01 MAYOR DECISION ON THE PETITION OF WILLIAM ARNOLD REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 10 LINDEN STREET R-1 A hearing on thispetition was held on September 18,2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Nicholas Helides, Stephen Harris, Joseph Barbeau and Bonnie Belair. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and others and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. Petitioner requests a Special Permit to construct a garage/addition per Section 8-6 and 8-4 of the Zoning Ordinance for the property located at 10 Linden Street located in a R- 1 zone. The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to this request for a Special Permit is section 5-3 (2) (8), which provides as follows: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing in this Ordinance, the Board of Appeal may, in accordance with the procedure and conditions set forth in Section 8-6 • and 9-4, grant Special Permits for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming structures, and for changes, enlargement, extension of expansion, of nonconforming lots, land, structures, and uses, provided however, that such change, extension, enlargement of 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. A. Special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect the land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other lands, buildings or stuctures in the same district. B. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve Substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner. C. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and Without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the ordinance. The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: • DECISION ON THE PETITION OF WILLIAM ARNOLD REUESTING A SPECIAL LEkYi'S �rj-J�c a • PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 10 LINDEN STREET R-1 page two 1091 SEP 1. Petitioner's William Arnold and his wife are the owners of a three family house atS p to.. 01 10 Linden Street. They wish to build an addition including new garage with second floor living space. Mr. Arnold stated that he is a carpenter/contractor in the home improvement'business, renovating homes in the surrounding communities. He does not wok out of any part of his home. He stated that he would not use the space created by the new addition to operate his business. Instead he seeks to expand the living space available to his growing family. 2. Petitioner owns and operates several large commercial vehicles tin connection with his business, which include a flatbed truck, a UPS panel type truck and a cherry picker. Commercial vehicles of this type may not be parked overnight in the residential districts under City Ordinances 3. Because of opposition to the proposed addition on the part of David Guy of 7 Linden Street and other neighbors, Ward Councillor Kim Driscoll negotiated a draft letter of agreement, memorializing the neighbors reservations regarding the granting of the Arnold's petition. The letter proposed conditioning the granting of the Special Permit upon the Arnold's agreement to five conditions, including not parking any commercial vehicles on the property or the street, and not operating the business at the residence. The Arnolds did not oppose the conditions set • forth in the Driscoll letter. 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. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would involve substantial hardship on the petitioner. 2. The relief requested 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. 3. The Special Permit granted can be granted in harmony with the neighborhood and will promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 5 in favor and 0 in opposition, to grant the relief requested, subject to the following conditions: 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statues, codes ordinances and regulations. 2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted and approved by the Building Inspector. • DECISION ON THE PETITION OF WILLIAM ARNOLD REQUESTING A SPECIAL • PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 10 LINDEN STREET R-1 page three 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. A Certificate of Occupancy is to be obtained. 7. Addition shall be use for residential living space. 8. No commercial or office space at the promises. 9. There shall not truck or commercial vehicles parked on premises. 10. Property shall be restricted to use as a 3 family structure and construction of addition shall be completed in a timely manner. SPECIAL PERMIT GRANTED September 18, 2002 ,, J I C \ Nina Cohen, Chairman Board of Appeals A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK Appeal from this decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17, of MGL Chapter 40A, and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 11, the Variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision, bearing the certification of the City Clerk that the 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. ti N r- � m m �C N N C: Ln O' - Y�.. rn x O p N CITY OF SALEM, C/ co MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL ��FRf(•��C 3 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR S OFF/ SALEM, MA O 1970 C TEL. (978) 745-9595 �✓1 FAX (978) 740-9846 szo `4 STANLEY�AYOSROVICZ, JR. ry 40 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JOSEPH MENTO REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5 MAPLE AVENUE R1 A hearing on this petition was held August 21, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Joan Boudreau, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair 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. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from front setback to construct a 7' x 30' farmers porch. The proposed porch would have a setback of 6 feet instead of the required 15 feet for the property located at 5 Maple Avenue 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1.Mr. Mento and his family live in this one family structure that is currently under extensive cosmetic renovations. 2. Mr. Mento represented himself at the hearing and presented his plans. 3. The proposed farmers porch would have a left side setback of 31/2 feet that matches the existing side setback of the home and the front setback of 6 feet. 4.A petition was submitted with 8 names in favor of this petition. • 5. There was no opposition to the plans. DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JOSEPH MENTO REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5 MAPLE AVENUE R-1 page two 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 5-0 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. VARIANCE GRANTED August 21, 2002 Joan Boudreau Board of Appeal ti r:• ro n7' : • v� r i ,cr, D or „a �rT 4 �T 0 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JOSEPH MENTO REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5 MAPLE AVENUE 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 day 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 1 DC. -C of(/, D C:).l- s m O �� U." CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL 1 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • ,�a SALEM, MA 01970 fi�A�c6y� J' TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR n m �T N �CP DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JERMYN FAMILY REQUESTING A rn Crrr VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 96 MARLBOROUGH ROAD D ",i3 o- A hearing on this petition was held July 17, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Joan Boudreau, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair and Nicholas o D Helides 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 c General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from lot width and lot size to construct a single for the property located at 96 Marlborough Road 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1.The petitioner, the Jermyn Family Trust, purchased the property at 96 Marlborough Road from the City of Salem in 1956. 2. The deed from the City of the petitioner indicated that the property contained 5,000 square feet of land. 3. A 1997 survey of the property submitted to the Board shows that the property contains only 4,924 square feet of land and is only 50 feet width (frontage). 4.The property did originally consist of 5,000 square feet when it was initially subdivided, however, a taking by the City of Salem of a narrow strip of land along the front of the property for the purpose of laying out Marlborough Road diminished the size of the lot • by 76 square feet. The basis of hardship is the taking by the City with no consideration. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF THE JERMYN FAMILY TRUST REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 96 MARLBOROUGH ROAD page two 5. If the taking had not occurred, the property would have been protected as a buildable lot by virtue of the provisions of M.G.L. Chapter 40A, Section 6 6. There are numerous other lots in the neighborhood with houses that are less than 5,000 sq. ft 7.Construction of a house upon the property will not result in any loss of visibility of oncoming traffic on Marlborough Road. 8. A letter from the owner of 92 Marlborough Road, Donna Gautreau was read into the record. Donna Gautreau was in attendance at the meeting and voiced her objection to development of the subject lot on the basis of traffic and visibility issues. 9. A petition signed by 7 neighbors in favor, was received and read into the record. 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 5-0 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. 0 5. Petitioner is to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy. 6. Petitioner shall obtain proper street numbering from the City of Salem Assessors • office ad shall display said number so as to be visible from the street. r ')3� h.3 • DECISION OF THE PETITION ON JERMYN FAMILY TRUST REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 96 MARLBOROUGH ROAD page three 7. Removal of ledge to be conducted between hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. in compliance with the Cit Ordinance VARIANCE GRANTED July 17, 2002 /// / [� Nicholas Flelides 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 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 ti o C-) r- r�`- m ;0o cn Cn D �Z o m� .c a i. • CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS .BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEM, PSA 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE • �1 . l'1sc SALEM, 970 TEL. (978)) 7 7455-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. - 1001 MAY -3 P MAYOR DECISION ON THE PETITION OF JOSEPH L'HEUREAUX REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16 MASON STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held on April 24 2002, with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman„ Richard Dionne , Nicholas Helides, Joan Boudreau and Stephen Harris. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and other and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting Variances from lot coverage, existing regulations calls for no more than 36% of the proposed lot coverage is 45% for improvement to facade for the property located at 16 Mason Street R-2. The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding of the Board that: a. Special conditions and circumstances exit which especially affect the land, building • or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other lands, buildings or structures in the same district. b. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner c. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance. The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner seeks variances for lot coverage of 45% for a proposed 2-'h-story garage to be built. The city ordinance allows for lot coverage of 35% 2. The petitioner stated that the garage was for his personal use to store a boat and personal items. 3. Two direct abutters spoke in opposition to the petition stating that the size of the garage would be too large for the area. 4. Councillor Mike Bencal, Ward 6 spoke in opposition to the petition stating that the parking situation wasn't addressed satisfactorily. •. 5. Jim Fleming who lives in the neighborhood stated that the petitioner failed to show any hardship that would merit allowing the petition. • DECISION ON THE PETITION OF JOSPEH L'HEAUREAUX REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16 MASON STREET R2 page two On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented at the hearing, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows: 1. Special conditions do not exist which especially affect the subject property and not the district in general. 2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would not result in unnecessary hardship to the petitioner. 3. The relief requested cannot be granted without substantial detriment to the public good or without nullifying and substantially hardship derogating from the intent of the district or purpose of the Ordinance. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 5 in opposition to grant the requested variances. Having failed to garner the four affirmative votes required to pass, the motion is defeated and the petition is denied. • VARIANCE DENIED APRIL 24, 2002 l � Stephen Harris a ice, 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 MGL Chapter 40A and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 11, the Variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the Certification of the City Clerk that 20 days have passed and no appeal has been filed, or that, if such appeal has been filed, that it has been dismissed or denied is recorded in the South Essex Registry of Deeds and indexed under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owners Certificate of Title. • Board of Appeal co CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL . 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CITY OF SALEM, �So SALEM, MA 01970 CLERK'S OFFICE • 0 TEL. (978) 745-9595 . FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR 1D01 APR -2 P 1: 14 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF IRENE MURRAY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 MEAD COURT R-2 A hearing on this petition was held March 20, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Richard Dionne, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belair 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. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from rear yard setback to install roof over existing deck for the property located at property located at 7 Mead Court R-2 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. The Petitioner appeared before the board to request a variance from the rear yard setback. 2. Petitioner would like to install a roof over existing deck 3. A letter was submitted in favor form Mr. & Mrs. Benadet 4. There was no opposition to the proposed petition. • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF IRENE MURRAY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 MEAD COURT R-2 page two 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 5-0, 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. VARIANCE GRANTED MARCH 20, 2002 Bonnie Belair Csc^ 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 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. v6�C NUIT,y�' CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEM, MA 2 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR - CLERp{'S OFFICE SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 gay' FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY MAYOR VICZ, JR. 160Z DEC -4 P. 3: 03 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF SUPERIOR LANDSCAPE INC. REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 17 MEADOW STREET B-4 A hearing on this petition was held November 20, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, Stephen Harris and Nicholas Helides 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 New in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting a Variance for use of the premises for a landscaping business to include an office, equipment repair&exterior parking of vehicles for the property located at 17 Meadow Street located in a B-4 zone. The Variances, which have been requested, upon a finding 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 this 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. Attorney George W. Atkins III, 59 Federal Street, Salem represented the petitioners. 2. The property is currently used as an automobile repair garage, which is an allowed use in the B-4 Automotive Business-zoning district. 3. Petitioner intends to use the property for a landscaping business. The interior of the structure will be used for an office and storage of landscaping equipment and repairs. Business vehicles will be parked at the rear of the structure in accordance with the plot plan submitted. 4. The existing nonconforming building will not be altered or enlarged. • 'CITY OF SALEM. MA CLERK'S OFFICE • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF SUPERIOR LANDSCAPE INC. REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 17 MEADOW STREET B-4 page two 1001 DEC -4 P 3: 09 5. Petitioner's business is seasonal and services are performed at customer homes and businesses. The petitioner presented evidence that he has operated his business in residential neighborhoods without objection. 6. A list of permitted uses in the Automotive Business zoning district does not specifically contain a landscaping business. 7. The size and shape of the parcel and the condition of the soil due to prior industrial uses limits the uses of the property. 8. The petitioners met with abutters to the property prior to the hearing, who had no objections to the proposed change of use. 9. No one appeared in opposition to the petition. On the basis of the above finding of fact, 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 petition. 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 5-0, to grant the Variances requested, subject to the following conditions; 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statures, ordinances, codes and regulations. 2. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 3. Petitioner shall obtain a Certificate of Inspection. • LEM. MA DECISION OF THE PETITION OF SUPERIOR LANDSCAPE INC. REQUL�J S'A 'M • VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 17 MEADOW STREET JW K' three 2001 DEC -4 P 3: 09 4. Petitioner shall obtain proper street numbering from the City of Salem Assessors Office and shall display said numbers 5. The decision is contingent upon petitioner or its nominee becoming the fee owner of The property. 6. No long term parking of company vehicles or employee vehicles shall be allowed on Meadow Street. Variance Granted / November 20, 2002 /(,// CSC Nina Cohen, Chairman Board of Appeal • A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CIITY 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 day 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 • e co CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CITY OF SALEM.-MA 1 fr SALEM, MA 01970 CLERK'S OFFICE a TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAx (978) 740-9846846 J. STANLEYMAY,OR VICZ, JR. .?001 APR -2 P 1. 1 U DECISION OF THE PETITION OF GAUTHIER REALTY TRUST REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 22 NICHOLS STREET R-1 A hearing on this petition was held March 20, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Richard Dionne, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belair 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. The petitioner is requesting a Variance to allow three dwelling units and a Variance to the requirements to allow the two off street parking spaces for the property located at 22 Nichols Street 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. The Petitioner, Gauthier Realty Trust, Pamela Gauthier McElmon is the owner of property located at 22 Nichols Street. 2. Attorney Joseph Correnti, 63 Federal Street represented the petitioner. 3. The property has been used as a multi-family dwelling since the mid 1970's, first as a two family and than as a three family in this R-1 district. 4. The plan as presented shows that the petitioner has two off-street parking spaces on the promises. • 5. The petitioner seeks a Variance to allow the existing three dwelling units in this R-1 zone. • DECISION OF THE PETITIONOF GAUTHIER REALTY TRUST REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 22 NICHOLS STREET R-1 6. No changes are proposed to the premises. 7. Since 1978, the property has been rented and occupied as a three-family, with no members of the family living there. 8. The petitioner submitted a copy of the City of Salem Building Department street card That lists the dwelling as a three-family, as well as assessors record prepared by Patriot Properties for the City of Salem, which listed the dwelling as a three-family. 9. A petition with the signatures of six neighbors supporting the petition was submitted. 10. An abutter to the property Mr. Butler of 24 Nichols Street spoke in opposition the Petition to allow the three family use, stating that parking on Nichols Street was extremely tight. 11. The petitioner, Pamela Gauthier McElmon, testified that when her family purchased the property in 1977, there were separate kitchens on the first and second floors of the dwelling. 12. Ward 4 Councillor O'Leary stated that in the several decades that he has walked through this neighborhood, he always believed that the property was a two family residence and suggested that the petitioner may want to modify its petition to seek • the allowance of two dwelling units rather than three dwelling units. 13.The Petitioner's Attorney, Joseph Correnti, after consultation with the petitioner, . requested that the petition be modified to allow two dwelling units, as well as a Variance to the parking requirement for two units. 14. The petitioner agreed to remove the third floor kitchen to ensure that the premises only be used as a two family. 15. The petitioner testified that she was managing the estate of her deceased father, who originally purchased this property, and whose estate is the beneficial owner of the Realty Trust, and that a denial of the Variance requested would cause a substantial financial hardship to the petitioner. 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. DECISION ON THE PETITION OF GAUTHIER REALTY TRUST REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 22 NICHOLS STREET R-1 page three Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 4-1, 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. That the petition is hereby modified to request a variance to allow two dwelling units and a Variance to the parking requirements for two units. 6. That all tenant separation between the second and third floor units be removed and that the third floor stove and other cooking appliances be removed, and that no cooking facilities are allowed on the third floor. VARIANCE GRANTED MARCH 20, 2002 Stephen Harris, CSC 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 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 • v��co CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS CITy OF S BOARD OF APPEAL ALEM, MA y 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERH'S OFFICE SALEM, MA 01970 ®� • �q TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 1001 OCT 20 p 03 . MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF AMERADA HESS CORPORATION REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 86 NORTH STREET B-1 A hearing on this petition was held October 16, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Joan Boudreau, Stephen Harris, 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 Variances for side yard setback and Section 7-2 of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to construct a convenience store and one new pump location.for the property located at 86 North Street located in an B-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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Attorney Joseph Correnti, 63 Federal Street, Salem, represented the Petitioner Amerada Hess Corporation, the owner of the property located at 86 North Street. 2. On this site, Petitioner operates a gasoline service station, which presently has nine gasoline-filling positions, four vacuum cleaner positions and a kiosk used for retail sales and payment. The site has been used as a gasoline filling station continuously since at least 1964 and has been run as a 24-hour operation since at least the 1970s. 3. The business has a retail sales component and office use, both of which are • allowed uses in this B-1 zoning district. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF AMERADA HESS CORPORATION REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 86 NORTH STREET B-1 page two 4. The proposed plan, as submitted, seeks to eliminate the kiosk and vacuum cleaners, add a Hess Express convenience store at the rear of the property, add a new gas pump with two filling positions in place of the kiosk and replace one existing single pump with a double pump (adding one filling position) for a total of 12 filling positions. 5. The Petition seeks Variances from the side and rear setbacks to allow the construction of the building as shown on the plan, and variances to the lot area and frontage requirements to accommodate the additional pumps. Without these variances, the Petitioner would suffer a hardship, as the size and shape of the lot would not allow the present configuration or any improvements thereto under current zoning. 6. The Board finds that the proposed plan will improve traffic flow on the site by moving the retail sales and payment counter to the rear of the property. The plan will improve traffic flow into the site by changing the existing North Street curb cut closest to Franklin Street to an "entrance only," thus eliminating an awkward egress that crosses oncoming North Street traffic. These improvements in traffic flow will benefit the neighboring properties. • 7. The proposed retail structure, which is approximately 1,660 square feet, will be of brick construction with an asphalt shingle roof, features suggested by the City's Planning Department and adopted by the Petitioner. 8. Except for the above design features which petitioner incorporated into the proposed plan, the Board found that some elements of petitioner's design were not sensitive to the predominent architecture of the area and to the site's prominent location in an Entrance Corridor District. The Board took the unusual step of mandating that specific changes to the design be approved by members of the City's Planning Department before a building permit could be issued. The design changes which must be approved are the following: removal of the green and white checkered banding from the building exterior, replacing steel pillars with brick pillars, and reconfiguring the glass entryway and white soffit with a more historically appropriate design, such design to be approved by the Assistant City Planner and her staff. 9. A petition in support of the project was submitted and signed by four abutting businesses. 10. There was no opposition to the Petition. 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 40 • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF AMERADA HESS CORPORATION REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 86 NORTH STREET B-1 page three 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 5-0 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. • 3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 4. Petitioner is to obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction. 5. Exterior finishes of the new construction shall reflect the surrounding neighborhood, which includes: a. The Hess Express building shall be constructed of clay brick; b. The roof of the proposed building shall be finished with asphalt shingles; c. The front doorway to the building shall be redesigned with the input and approval of Denise Sullivan, Assistant City Planner; d. The green and white checkered banding shown on the building shall be removed from the design; and e. The entrance columns shown on the plan will be clad in brick. 6. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained. 7. Petitioner shall obtain proper street numbering from the City of Salem Assessor's Office and shall display said number so as to be visible • from the street. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF AMERADA HESS CORPORATION REQESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 86 NORTH STREET B-1 page four 8. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Planning Board. 9. The Petitioner shall take all reasonable measures to prevent loitering on the premises and monitor any continuing misuse thereof, particularly during the weekend evening hours. Such measures shall include, but not be limited to, maintaining two or more employees onsite at all times so that the exterior of the building can be monitored regularly, and training such employees on the detrimental effects of loitering on the neighborhood and on business. 10. The Petitioner shall not display any products (including soda) outside the building itself and will avoid the use of sandwich signs on the premises. 11. All deliveries shall be done in accordance with the City Ordinances. VARIANCE GRANTED OCTOBER 16, 2002 • Nina Cohen, Chairman Board of Appeals • A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK Appeal from this decision, if any, 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 t • • v��coxn CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHl rT0T%ALEM. MA BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MA 01970 • s TEL. (978) 745.9595 FAX (978) 740-984e lUU)„BAR _2 P. 56 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JOHN KALANTZIS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 145 NORTH STREET B-1 A hearing on this petition was held December 18, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Bonnie Belair, Nicholas Helides and Richard Dionne. 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 relief from side setback and lot coverage to construct a 16' x 22' addition for the property located at 145 North Street located in an B- 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner presented a site plan showing the location of the proposed 16' x 22' addition to the rear of the building with a side setback of 0' instead of the required 10'. The petitioner is the owner of King's Roast Beef. 2. Petitioner appeared in November and was requested to return the following month with a detailed parking plan, which also addressed the traffic flow. 3. There was objection to the petition by an abutter based on the traffic flow plan and existing noise issues. 4. There was an objection by another abutter to noise cause by early morning and late night trash removal from the site. The abutter was advised of the existing • noise ordinance and referred to the enforcement official. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JOHN KALANTZIS REQUESTING VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 145 NORTH STREET B-1 page two 5. Another abutter objected to both the traffic and noise issues and requested that the exit be moved closer to the building. Discussion of a change of the exit location was determined to cause potential I injury to both pedestrian and vehicles. 6. Another abutter requested both installation of curb stops and enclosure of the dumpster. 7. Letters in favor to the petition were from Councillor Michael Bencal, Michael O'Boyle of 141 Rear North Street and David Bonner of 5 School Street. 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. 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 plans and dimension 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. Certificate of Inspection shall be obtained. 7. Installation of curb stops for all parking spaces. 0 8. Dumpster to be enclosed. DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JOHN KALANTZIS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 145 NORTH STREET B-1 page three VARIANCE GRANTED - DECEMBER 18, 2002 Nicholas Helides Q.VZS Board of Appeal A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CIITY 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 day 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 • co 1 CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEM. MA art 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE • SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 9�mn FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR 1001 MAR 2l P 3 21 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF RICHARD LAMBY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3 OCEAN AVENUE R-1 A hearing on this petition was held March 20, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Richard Dionne, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belair 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. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from rear yard setback (22 feet), side setback (6.5 feet) and lot density (41%) for the property located at 3 Ocean Avenue located in a 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Mr. Ray Guertin, architect for the Petitioner presented the proposed plans showing the two-story addition. 2. Petitioner has a growing family and needs more room for his family. 3. There was no opposition to the plans submitted. • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF RICHARD LAMBY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3 OCEAN AVENUE R-1 page two 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 5-0, 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. VARIANCE GRANTED ✓�r e MARCH 20, 2002 C�K� Richard Dionne Board of Appeal • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF RICHARD LAMBY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3 OCEAN AVENUE 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 • • 0o Irt� CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEALCITY OF SALEPI,.MA 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOCEERK'S OFFICE SALEM, MA 01970 • .1 TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEYJ.MAY,OR VICZ, JR. 2001 MAR 21 P 3 21 DECISION OF THE PETITION OFARTHUR EMERY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1-17 ORNE SQUARE R-2 A hearing on this petition was held March 20, 2002 the following Board Members were present: Nina Cohen Chairman, Stephen Harris, Nicholas Helides, Richard Dionne and Bonnie Belair. 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 the Salem Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant leave to withdraw this petition without prejudice for Variance to allow a curb cut for the property located at 1-17 Orne Square R-2. • GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE March 20, 2002 ' J ,,vrt�,(i OA4 s-( � 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 • ooxol l� CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEM, MA 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SRD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE • ` lSr SALEM, MA 01970 ee� E� J�NR' TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 1001 AUG 22 P 2: 22 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF WENDY'S INTERNATIONAL REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5 PARADISE ROAD B-2 A hearing on this petition was held August 21, 2002 the following Board Members were present: Nina Cohen Chairman, Bonnie Belair, Richard Dionne, Joan Boudreau, 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. At the request of the petitioner the Salem Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant leave to withdraw this petition without prejudice for a Variance to allow a second free-standing sign, Section 7-5 of Salem Sign Ordinance for the property located at 5 Paradise Road located in a B-2 zone. GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE. August 21, 2002 /� f 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. Is Board of Appeal CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEM. MA 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE • SALEM, MA 01970 ®� TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. '.IOOI OCT 2 j P L: I U MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF FLEET BANK REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 21 PARADISE ROAD R1/B1 A hearing on this petition was held October 16, 2002 meeting with the following Board Members were present: Nina Cohen Chairman, Nicholas Helides, Joseph Barbeau, Joan Boudreau 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. At the request of the petitioner, the Salem Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant leave to withdraw this petition without prejudice for a Variance from parking requirements to eliminate 10 parking spaces to construct a drive thru ATM Machine for the property located at 21 Paradise Road located in an 131/131 zone. GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE OCTOBER 16, 2002 J /� CS cr� 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 CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS SALEM. MA �v BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MA 01 970 9ft'i, g TEL. (978) 745-9595 OTANLEY J. UFAX (978) 740-9846SOVICZ, JR. 1001 MAYOR JUN 20 P 4= 53 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF CHRISTOPHER KINNON REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9 PARALLEL STREET R-2 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 & rear setback to construct an addition. Front setback will be 12' rather than 15' and rear setback of 21' instead of the required 30' for the property located at 9 Parallel Street located in an R-2 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner desires to construct an addition to a single-family residence located at 9 Parallel Street in Salem. The 15 x 20 foot room would be set back 12 feet from the front property line, instead of the required 15 feet and the rear setback would be 21 feet instead of the required 30 feet. 2. The existing house is nonconforming as to front and rear setbacks, and it abuts on extensive wetlands, Rosie's Pond, at the rear property line. The proposed addition would extend no further towards the rear of the property than the existing nonconforming house, and would be setback 5 feet from the front of the house. 3. Petitioner stated that he appeared before the Salem Conservation Commission and presented his plan for the proposed addition. He stated that the members had no • opposition to the proposed plan. No one appeared to present any opposition to the • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF CHRISTOPHER KINNON REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9 PARALLEL STREET R-2 page two proposed plan at the present ZBA meeting either. 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. CE G RANTED June 19 June 19, 2002 Nina Cohen CSCr 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 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 • �o+w CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL moi^ i _ . i.♦ LEr',r( S U,-,:ICE 3 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MA 01970 6 TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 IIQ C� STANLEY J. U$OVICZ, JR. 1 .1 SIP 19 P 2: 49 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JAMES DONOVAN REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12 PLANTERS STREET A hearing on this petition was held August 21, 2002 and continued to the September 18, 2002 meeting with the following Board Members were present: Nina Cohen Chairman, Bonnie Belair, Nicholas Helides, Joseph Barbeau 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. At the request of the petitioner the Salem Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant leave to withdraw this petition without prejudice for a Variance from side setback and density to construct a 2 story for the property located at 12 Planters Street located in an R-2 zone. GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE SEPTEMBER 18, 2002 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 Hca CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL e a 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • SALEM, MA O 1970 _o n q •^•• TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 o MCD Mo STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. ~ T MAYOR > W N C) D nM Ta DECISION ON THE PETITION OF JOHN DIONNE REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMft M:1 FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8 PROCTOR STREET R-2 cn D t A hearing on this petition was held on October 16, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Nicholas Helides, Stephen Harris, Joseph Barbeau 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. Petitioner requests a Special Permit for the operation of woodworking shop and other constructed related light industrial use for the property located at 8 Proctor Street located in a R-2 zone. The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to this request for a Special Permit is section 5-3 (2) (8), which provides as follows: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing in this Ordinance, the Board of • Appeal may, in accordance with the procedure and-conditions set forth in Section 8-6 and 9-4, grant Special Permits for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming structures, and for changes, enlargement, extension of expansion, of nonconforming lots, land, structures, and uses, provided however, that such change, extension, enlargement of 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. A. Special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect the land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other lands, buildings or. stuctures in the same district. B. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve Substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner. C. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and Without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the ordinance. The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented, and • after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: • DECISION ON THE PETITION OF JOHN DIONNE REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8 PROCTOR STREET R-2 page two 1. The Petitioner's will make significant improvements to this otherwise vacant and rundown property, which will be to the benefit of all. 2. The nature of this operation will be to create woodworking pieces specifically for construction projects, and not for retail sale; there will be no showroom or displays. 3. The hours of operation for this business will be Monday through Friday from 7:30 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. and on Saturdays from 8:00 until noon. 4. There exists a lot that provides sufficient parking to support this business. 5. Any signage for this business will be reviewed and approved where applicable by the Sign Review Board. 6. Councillor Kevin Harvey spoke in favor to this request. 7. There was no opposition to this petition. 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. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would involve substantial hardship on the petitioner. 2. The relief requested 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. 3. The Special Permit granted can be granted in harmony with the neighborhood and will promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 5 in favor and 0 in opposition, to grant the relief requested, subject to the following conditions: 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statues, codes ordinances and regulations. 2. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained. 3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. • 4. A Certificate of Inspection shall be obtained. DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JOHN DIONNE REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERT LOCATED AT 8 PROCTOR STREET R-2 page three 5. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board of Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Planning Board. SPECIAL PERMIT GRANTED n October 16, 2002 - „'/"/Jz Barbeau Board of Appeals A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK Appeal from this decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17, of MGL Chapter 40A, and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 11, the Variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision, bearing the certification of the City Clerk that the 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. • CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL c1f ,,E ��.Lrl' "AU. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR r1 S f)FFfC 1�; f SALEM, MA 01 970 E TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. 1001 MAYOR JUL -2 A 10. 10 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF K. RICKY THOMPSON REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12 READ STREET R-2 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 side setback to construct a 2 story addition front for the property located at 12 Read Street located in an R-2 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner is seeking relief from a side yard setback to construct a 6 x 21 two story addition. 2. Plans were submitted showing the proposed addition. 3. There was no opposition to the petition. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF K. RICKY THOMPSON REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12 READ STREET R-2 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. VARIANCE GRANTED June 19, 2002 n Joan Boudreau CSCw� Board of Appeal • i • 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 • CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CIT i 0 F `'ri LE i7 11A c 'fid` 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLER CS OFFICE SALEM, MA 01970 9eciyMB�P TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ. JR. [9 OGZ FE8 21 P 2: 21 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF RICHARD CURLEY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16 RIVERBANK ROAD A hearing on this petition was held February 20, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belair 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. The petitioner is requesting a Variance for relief from rear yard setback to construct proposed addition for the property located at 16 Riverbank 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Richard Curley, owner of record appeared before the Board and presented the detail of the proposed addition to the property located at FrRiverbank Road. T 16 CS,y 2. The proposed addition will reduce the property setback to 25 feet from the rear property boundary. 3. There was no opposition to the proposed petition. • .�o CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEM. MA �\ (, 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE SALEM, MA 01 970 ' TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. VICZ, .1 R. .1001 FEB 21 P 2: 21 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF RICHARD CURLEY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16 RIVERBANK ROAD A hearing on this petition was held February 20, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belair 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. The petitioner is requesting a Variance for relief from rear yard setback to construct proposed addition for the property located at 16 Riverbank 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Richard Curley, owner of record appeared before the Board and presented the detail of the proposed addition to the property located at 15 Riverbank Road. T 2. The proposed addition will reduce the property setback to 25 feet from the rear property boundary. 3. There was no opposition to the proposed petition. • • DECISION OF.THE PETITION OF RICHARD CURLEY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16 RIVERBANK ROAD R-1 page two 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. A Certificate of Inspection is to be obtained. 5. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction. 6. Exterior finishes of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing structure. Variance Granted �1 � �eQ CSL February 20, 2002 Nicholas Helides Board of Appeals • A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK Appeal from this decision, if any, 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 • v��co I ko CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS g BOARD OF APPEAL "� r� 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CC ER' �C1.�. • � / o SALEM, MA 01970 K S cVc6C11A FTEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. 1191 SCP _4 A 9.. 40 MAYOR DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MARK PETIT REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5 SKERRY STREET COURT R-2 A hearing on this petition was held on August 21, 2002, with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman„ Richard Dionne , Joan Boudreau, Stephen Harris and Bonnie Belair. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and other and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting Variances from lot size, frontage, density, front, rear and side setbacks to construct a single family dwelling for the property located at 5 Skerry Street Court located in an R-2 zone. The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding of the Board that: a. Special conditions and circumstances exit which especially affect the land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other lands, buildings or structures in the same district. • b. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner c. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance. The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Attorney Stephen Lovely of 14 Story Street in Salem represented the petitioner, Mark Petit. 2. Mr. Petit had been granted a request by the Historic Commission to tear down an existing garage that was in deplorable condition 3. Mr. Petit purchased an additional 300+/-sq ft piece of land that would increase his total square frontage to 2600 sq ft and also create an additional parking space for the property. 4. Mr. Petit had previously appeared before the Zoning Board of Appeal with this same request for a variance. He was denied. 5. Speaking in opposition to this petition was Mike O'Brien, 4 Skerry St. Court, Pat Cahill, 1 Skerry St. Court, Ray Hodge, 6 Skerry St. Court, Cameron Clark, 4 Skerry St. Court and Laura Jones, 4 Skerry St. Court. • • DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MARK PETIT REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR C THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5 SKERRY STREET COURT R2 �Ff. ✓ `,: page two i 6. Neighbors opposition included parking, drainage, snow removal and the fact the. /0' Y. there would be no room for a fire truck to enter close enough to the proposed �� structure. On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented at the hearing,9 9 y0 the Board of Appeal concludes as follows: 1. Special conditions do not exist which especially affect the subjecy property and not the district in general. 2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would not result in unnecessary hardship to the petitioner. 3. The relief requested cannot be granted without substantial detriment to the public good or without nullifying and substantially hardship derogating from the intent of the district or purpose of the Ordinance. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 0 in favor and 5 in opposition to grant the requested variances. Having failed to garner the four affirmative votes required to pass, the motion is defeated and the petition is denied. • VARIANCE DENIED AUGUST 21, 2002 Joan Boudreau 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 MGL Chapter 40A and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 11, the Variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the Certification of the City Clerk that 20 days have passed and no appeal has been filed, or that, if such appeal has been filed, that it has been dismissed or denied is recorded in the South Essex Registry of Deeds and indexed under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owners Certificate of Title. • Board of Appeal goo k CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL _ 21 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR Si� /•sem SALEM, MA 01970 • �s9� -�F` TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 0 C-)� STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. "'' fT1p MAYOR C �-n r N N cn 7y U1 O m y ms's m3 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF PERRY & JULIE GOUTZOS REQUESTING A v VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16 SOUTH STREET R1 A hearing on this petition was held July 17, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Joan Boudreau, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair and Nicholas Helides 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 to construct a 2 '/2 story addition for the property located at 16 South Street R-1 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 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 appeared and represented themselves at the hearing 2. Petitioners explained how they would like to add a 2 Y2 story addition for their growing family. 3. The variance requested is a front setback of 3 feet instead of the required 15 feet. 4.Two letters were submitted in favor of the petition from Ramone Barcklay of 14 South Street and Jeff rey.Guy of 18 South Street. 5. There was no opposition to this petition. • iDECISION OF THE PETITION OF PERRY & JULIE GOUTZOS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16 SOUTH STREET R-1 page two 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 substar tial 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 5-0 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. VARIANCE GRANTED July 17, 2002 1p�P ichard Dionne WC J Board of Appeal o� ti ,C 7 ti C17 -77 D `"a • -Y7 rr, 5 �3 • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF PERRY & JULIE GOUTZOS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16 SOUTH STREET R1 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 day 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 ti ti oa a� Nro wr CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS p BOARD OF APPEAL "I ' •`+-��-L� 1. IIA CLERK'S OFFICE 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR ��a. SALEM, MA 01970 'gBIt` TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. SO 19 P 5: 12 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JAMES SULLY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT ONE SOUTH MASON /83 NORTH STREET A hearing on this petition was held September 18, 2002 meeting with the following Board Members were present: Nina Cohen Chairman, Bonnie Belair, Nicholas Helides, Joseph Barbeau 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. At the request of the petitioner the Salem Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant leave to withdraw this petition without prejudice for a Variance from the Salem Zoning Ordinance 7-5 Signs, to install an off-street parking sign on the roof of the building for the property located at 83 North Street • GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE SEPTEMBER 18, 2002 �. O L50_� " 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. is Board of Appeal v��co CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL LI ["I" Ur HA - 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE �. • %,:' /' r SALEM, MA 01970 9Bgm� TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. ZOOZ JUL -2 A 10: 1 q 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 Iother 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner is 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 Board. 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 no opposition to this petition. • • 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 Jbe h BarbeScJ a p Board of Appea`�l • 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 • • v��coaw CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS CITY' BOARD OF APPEAL CLERKS MA S OFFICE 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • S�� SALEM, 01970 WAP' TEL. (978)) 745-9595 FAx (978) 740-984646 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. JAN -2 P 3� Sb MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF FRANCIS DELEO REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8-10 SYLVAN STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held December 18, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Bonnie Belair, Nicholas Helides, Stephen Harris and Richard Dionne. 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 dimensional Variances required to subdivide the parcel for the property located at 8-10 Sylvan Street located in an R-2 zone. The Variances, which have been requested, may be granted upon a finding Eby.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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Attorney George Atkins, 59 Federal Street represented the petitioner. 2. Petitioner request dimensional variances required in order to subdivide the parcel which contains a two unit residential dwelling (10 Sylvan Street) and a single- family residential dwelling (8Sylvan Street). 3. There is sufficient parking on the lots. 4. Cross easements for access to the rear lot and parking in the garage on the rear lot will be signed in connection with the subdivision. 5. Councillor Michael Bencal spoke in favor of this petition. • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF FRANCIS DELEO REQUESTING VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8-10 SYLVAN STREET R-2 page two 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. 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 5-0 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 requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall • be strictly adhered to. 3. Exterior finishes of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing structure. 4. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Planning Board 5. Cross easement be recorded providing for parking and access right to the parcels. VARIANCE GRANTED DECEMBER 18, 2002 Richard Dionne Board of Appeal • A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CIITY 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 day 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 • �o,m CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS �vQ' BOARD OF APPEAL 3 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR >} � �. SALEM, MA O 1970 '3 TEL. (978) 745-9595 'irmued� FAX (978) 740-9846 _ STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. r� MAYOR C ;a r � N Ncn CDD DECISION ON THE PETITION OF DAVID JONES REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERIINIT nr" FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 33 WASHINGTON SQ NORTH/2 OLIVER D 3 STREET R-2 = m3 O D A hearing on this petition was held on July 17,2002 with the following Board Members`- present: Nina Cohen, Richard Dionne, Nicholas Helides, Joan Boudreau and Bonnie Belair. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and others and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. Petitioner requests a Special Permit to convert a Carriage House to a single-family residence for the property located at 33 Washington Sq. North/2 Oliver Street located in a R-2 zone. The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to this request for a Special Permit is section 5-3 (2) (8), which provides as follows: • Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing in this Or the Board of Appeal may, in accordance with the procedure and conditions set forth in Section 8-6 and 9-4, grant Special Permits for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming structures, and for changes, enlargement, extension of expansion, of nonconforming lots, land, structures, and uses, provided however, that such change, extension, enlargement of 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. A. Special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect the land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other lands, buildings or stuctures in the same district. B. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve Substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner. C. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and Without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the ordinance. • The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: DECISION ON THE PETITION OF DAVID JONES REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 33 WASHINGTON SQ NORTH/2 OLIVER STREET R-2 page two 1. Petitioner David Jones appeared and represented himself at the hearing. 2. Plans were submitted showing the proposed construction. 3. There were several neighbors in opposition to the plans. They were Ramon Pariga, 5 Oliver St., Salvatore DeFranco, 7 Oliver St., Jayne Hackett 6 Oliver, Nancy Diitroia, 8 Oliver St, Lydia DeFranco, 7 Oliver St„ Harry McCoy, 23 Winter St and Kathleen Atchason of 26 Winter Street all with concerns about parking. 4. Neighbors concerns are both real and a source of aggravation to the Neighborhood, that the scope of this Board does not allow for any action on the Board's part to lessen this situation. and further that the only concerns that are Within the scope of this Board's authority concerns that the Petitioner provides the required off street parking, which was done. 5. Petitioner has received approval from the City of Salem Historic Commission. • 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. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would involve substantial hardship on the petitioner. 2. The relief requested 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. 3. The Special Permit granted can be granted in harmony with the neighborhood and will promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant the relief requested, subject to the following conditions: 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statues, codes ordinances and regulations. o ti n 2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted and approved by the Building Inspector. 3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safetNshall y� 0 is be strictly adhered to. � 4. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction. rT73 .n i DECISION OF THE PETITION OF DAVID JONES REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 33 WASHINGTON SQ. NORTH/2 OLIVER STREET R-2 page three 5. A Certificate of Occupancy is to be obtained. 6. Petitioner shall obtain proper street numbering from the City of Salem Assessors 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 jurisdiction including, but not limited to the Planning Board. Special Permit Granted July 17, 2002 lgeiphKarbeau 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 MGL Chapter 40A, and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 11, the Variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision, bearing the certification of the City Clerk that the 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. A- cq'V ^Oy �¢o CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL � a t si 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR GI) (1 SALEM, MA 0 1970 CLERK' TEL. (978) 745-9595 S OFFICE�� • p' FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR 1COZ S"" _4 A 9. 40 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JEFFREY SNELL REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 WEST TERRACE R1 A hearing on this petition was held August 21, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Joan Boudreau, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair 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. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from front setback and lot coverage to construct a 10 x 20 addition for the property located at 7 West Terrace 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner appeared and represented himself at the hearing. 2.Petitioner submitted plans showing the proposed addition. 3. The petitioner has a growing family and needs the extra space. 4. There was no opposition to the plans. • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JEFFREY SNELL REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 WEST TERRACE R-1 page two 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 5-0 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. VARIANCE GRANTED August 21, 2002 Bonnie Belair ac Board of Appeal N C` iJ C7- ^' �c v � i N cr, • r D �. rn� s 0 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JEFFREY SNELL REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 WEST TERRACE 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 day 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 F- (n r_- rn ` rJ -VC cn C 1 D � C= m CD • I CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS y OF Clj BOARD OF APPEAL TSALEM, MA 2 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK-S OFFICE �o. SALEM, MA 01970 • ms's •� _ TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. VICZ, .JR. 1001 MAY 1 � q I0: 48 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JEAN PAUL BANVILLE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9 WEST TERRACE R-1 A hearing on this petition was held May 15, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Richard Dionne, Joan Boudreau, Bonnie Belair 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. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from side yard setback and density to construct an addition on the rear of the home for the property located at 9 West Terrace 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Mr. Jean Paul Banville represented himself at the hearing. 2. Plans were submitted for the kitchen and bath. 3. Mr. Gary Raymond, of West Terrace spoke in favor of the proposal. 4. There was no opposition to the proposed plans. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JEAN PAUL BANVILLE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9 WEST TERRACE R-1 page two 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 5-0 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. VARIANCE GRANTED MAY 15, 2002 Richard Dionne 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 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 • .�o CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS t BOARD OF APPEAL CIT Y OF SALEM. MA ® 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE • 1 Is SALEM, MA 01970 (C TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 1001 MAY 22 A CC 58 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF LAUREL GUY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 22 WEST AVENUE R-1 A hearing on this petition was held May 15, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Richard Dionne, Joan Boudreau, Bonnie Belair 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. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from front yard setback to allow expansion of the kitchen for the property located at 22 West Avenue 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the Y hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Laurel Guy appeared and represented herself at the hearing. 2. Plans were submitted for the expansion of the kitchen. 3. There was no opposition to the proposed plans. • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF LAUREL GUY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 22 WEST AVENUE R-1 page two 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 5-0 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. VARIANCE GRANTED MAY 15, 2002 oan Boudreau 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 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 • • v6�coNu CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACFIUSETICCLER�Ft SALEM E A yc ` BOARD OF APPEAL r1,S OFFIC y, 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR ,. SALEM, MA 01970 • ""' TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAx (978) 740-9846 1001 JUL STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 25 P 2 39 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF CLAUDIA CHUBER REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3 WHITE STREET R1 A hearing on this petition was held July 17, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Joan Boudreau, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair and Nicholas Helides 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 rear yard setback to construct a deck for the property located at 3 White Street R-1 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1.The petitioner appeared and represented herself at the hearing 2. Plans were submitted showing the proposed deck to be constructed. 3. The proposed deck would have a rear setback of approximately 21/2 feet. 4.There was no opposition to this petition. . • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF CLAUDIA CHUBER REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3 WHITE STREET R-1 page two 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 5-0 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. VARIANCE GRANTED July 17, 2002 Joan Boudreau CSCE, Board of Appeal 0 ,d _n L r~ C � � �O c.n Vi Ch T O D tJ ter;r N n • w m� -� n DECISION OF THE PETITION OF CLAUDIA CHUBER REQUESTING A VARIANCE • FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3 WHITE STREET R1 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 day 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 • ti ti C')ti m -:0 CD n i � Uicn � on Qq r C� ti o3 0 m .o � • CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS;f ,, L =3� BOARD OF APPEAL CLERKS OFFTE 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR i�E • ` SALEM, MA 01 970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 107 JUL _ STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 2 A IOC ZQ MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF GEORGE GLYNOS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 WITCHCRAFT 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 side yard setback to allow an addition, which will consist of garage and rooms above to expand living space and relief from number of stories for the property located at 7 Witchcraft 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 Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1.Petitioner appeared and showed plans of the proposed addition and garage. 2 Petitioner stated he needs extra living space for his growing family. 3. John Tregg iari of 5 Pioneer Circle appeared and spoke in favor of the petition. 4. Mr. Chasse of 59 Ord Street had concerns about petitioner running his business of the home but h ad no opposition to the petition. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF GEORGE GLYNOS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 W ITHCCRAFT ROAD R-1 page two 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 a Certificate of Occupancy. VARIANCE GRANTED June 19, 2002 \ �IJ an Boudreau 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 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 • CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS CITY BOARD OF APPEAL OF SALEF9. MA 3 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLEWS OFFICE SALEM, MA 01970 • ��' • ^^ TEL. (978) 745-9595 A�igW� FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. 1001 MAY I l A 10; 48 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF GEORGE GLYONE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 WITCHCRAFT ROAD R-1 A hearing on this petition was held May 15, 2002 the following Board Members were present: Nina Cohen Chairman, Stephen Harris, Bonnie Belair, 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 the Salem Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant leave to withdraw this petition without prejudice for Variance from side setback to allow an addition, which will consist of garage and rooms above to expand living space for the property located at 7 Witchcraft Road located in a R-1 zone. • GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE MAY 15, 2002 ��rn�; l G�ir�Csc►�> 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