Loading...
2003-ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Q00�° svo�.S`,7a� 1��a�� �o � ��� 11 CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS CITY OF SALEM. MA BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE • ? X55 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MA 01970. TEL. (978) 745-9595 6W FAx (978) 740-9846 1003,MAR 2l A q STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ANA & ARLINDA BETTENCOURT REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 21 BALCOMB STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held March 19, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman„ Stephen Harris, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belair 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 New in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from lot coverage to construct a 20 x 26 garage for the property located at 21 Balcomb Street located in an R-2zone. 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. The petitioner's appeared and represented themselves at the hearing. 2. The petitioner is requesting a Variance for lot coverage to construct a 20 x 26 garage. Plans were shown showing the proposed addition. 3. There was no opposition to this petition. • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF AND & ARLINDA BETTENCOURT REQUESTING VARIANCES FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 21 BALCOMB STREET R-2 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: I. 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 construction shall be done as per the 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 March 19, 2003 Stephen Hams C Board of Appeal • A 0✓0' i 0, THIS DcCIJIOI\ HAS 'HN' i ILED 'AII i iii T'-r- PLr,NNlNl.i M'J r,i lRD I '_ . • THE C11-1 Y 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 recorded and noted on the owner's Certificate of Title. Board of Appeal • co CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL � 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MA 01 970 !� • TEL. (978) 745-9595 ��niNa FAX (978) 740.9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF NINA CLAY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 15 BARNES ROAD R-1 A hearing on this petition was held August 20, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Richard Dionne, Nicholas Helides, Joan Boudreau, Stephen Harris 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 New in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from rear yard setback to construct an addition for the property located at 15 Barnes Road located in an R-1 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. The petitioner is seeking a Variance from rear yard setback to construct an addition The rear setback will be 9.9" instead of 30". 2. Plans were submitted showing the proposed addition.. 3. A letter was submitted from Councillor Joan Lovely in favor of this petition. 4. Phillip Potvin of 2 Barnes Ave. spoke in favor of the petition. • 5. There was no opposition to this petition. DECISION OF THE PETITION OF NINA CLAY REQUESTING A VAR'ANCE FRG``p THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 15 BARNES ROAD R-1 page two On the basis of the above finding of fact, the evidence presented at the hearing, '� 39 Zoning Board of Appeal concludes as follows: Q 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 M, 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 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. 0'r� �Jc�cc�ceaaL Variance Granted )oan Boudreau (V J August 20, 2003 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 n rn r < N V T> w or -n n Q rT�3 r W • CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEM, MA � 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE SALEM, MA 01970 ggciypyg CPP TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 1003 APR -2 P 2. 32 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF MICHAEL& DEBRA BOUFFARD REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 19 BARR STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held March 19, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman„ Stephen Harris, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belair 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 New in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from side yard setback and rear yard setback to construct a 17 x 14 addition for the property located at 19 Barr 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. The petitioner's appeared and represented themselves at the hearing. 2. The petitioner is requesting a side yard setback of 5 feet instead of the required to feet and a rear setback of 7 feet instead of the allowed 30 feet.. Plans were shown showing the proposed addition.. 3. A petition was submitted with 4 names of abutters in favor of this petition. • 4. There was no opposition to this petition. DECISION OF THE PETITION OF MICHAEL& DEBRA BOUFFARD REQUESTING VARIANCES FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 19 BARR STREET R-2 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 conditionsexist 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 construction shall be done as per the 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 March 19, 2003 Stephen Harris \ Board of Appealc`sC � • /• � � '_;lJTHIS LCCIvlvl\ - v OC \ LE \ I -i•r I A h , vnvNYn: • THE CII 1 Y 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, 'rf 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 Tithe. Board of Appeal • • co CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS L BOARD OF APPEAL C4 pr 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR R�S!'4C SALEM, MA 0 1970 • a` TEL. (978) 745-9595 ' IQ OFF�F q FAx (978) 740-9846OJ* STANLEY J. YOSROVICZ, JR. �y?� A �r S4 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF PETER COPELAS REQUESTING A VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 69 BOSTON STREET R2 A hearing on this petition was held May 21, 2003 meeting with the following Board Members were present: Nina Cohen Chairman, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair, 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. At the request of the petitioner's Architect, Richard Griffin, the Salem Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant leave to withdraw this petition without prejudice requesting a Variance for the property located at 69 Boston Street located in a R-2 zone. • GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE MAY 21, 2003 r A . , 19'(S 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. 0 Board of Appeal CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS CITY OF SALEM. MA BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE 2 " 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • �L�. SALEM, MA 01970 a I), TEL. (978) 745-9595 9BG7 WN FAX (978) 740-9846 ,1003 JUL -2 P I: 11 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JOHN JEFFERS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 164 BOSTON STREET I A hearing on this petition was held June 25, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair, 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 New in accordance with Massm;IIUSettS General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting Dimensional Variances and an exception to the accessory structure limitation for the property located at 164 Boston Street located in an Industrial 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, John Jeffers operates a lumber and building supply business of the name on Boston Street. He seeks dimensional variances and an exception to the accessory structure limitation of Section 7-8(3) construct a 30 x 50 foot accessory storage building on the existing nonconforming lot. . 2. Attorney George Atkins of 59 Federal Street in Salem represented the petitioner. 3. According to a survey submitted with the application, the proposed structure will be sited at the rear left corner of the lot at a distance of 10 feet from the property line that is also the City of Salem's border. Side yard setback requirement in the Industrial • zone is 30 feet. The rear yard setback will also be 10 feet instead of 30 feet as required by the Ordinance • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JOHN JEFFERS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 164 BOSTON STREET I page two 4. Section 7-8 (3) of the Ordinance limits the size of unattached accessory structures to 120 square feet or 1% of the lot area. Mr. Jeffers is asking for a variance for the construction of the accessory building to enable his business to store an inventory of lumber and supplies. 5. There was no opposition to the proposed 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 construction shall be done as per the 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. Petitioner shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy. Variance Granted June 25, 2003 AXE Nina Cohen, Chairma Se�� 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 • • 0o CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSEa7,T BOARD OF APPEAL ��1QF SAL CLER c L'rfI-- 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3R6 FLOOR ' K�S QFr.� • ,r d NA SALEM, MA 01970 C E TEL. (978) 745.9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USMAYOVICZ, JR. :1007•MA•Y.�,4 :q tt. 43 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF MICHAEL&LINDA BLIER REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8 BROAD STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held April 30, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Stephen Harris, Richard Dionne,Bonnie Belair 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 New in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from rear yard setback and lot coverage to construct an addition for the property located at 8 Broad 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. The petitioner appeared and represented himself at the hearing. 2. Plans were submitted showing the proposed addition 3. The addition will be 6' x 24'. 4. There was no opposition to this petition. • .CITY OF SALf� cL�a1c•s of • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF MICHAEL &LINDA BLIER REQUESTING A iee VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8 BROAD STREET R-2 page two .100) MAY 14 A C; 43 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; I. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statures, ordinances, codes and regulations. • 2. All construction shall be done as per the 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 April 30, 200 JoseiphBarbeau cr- 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. 0 Board of Appeal o 01.1 .c N tnq D • 0o Ir CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CL CQFy SALEM, Vit= SALEM, MA 01970 CR�1�,S �F�'C,MA Ir �T's �RT TEL. (978) 745-9595 E �e4mrsc�' FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. lUU) MAY 9' 43 A MAYOR I4 DECISION ON THE PETITION OF JORDAN CASTRO REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT/VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 91-95 BRIDGE STREET 61 A hearing on this petition was held on April 30, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen,.Chairman, Richard Dionne, Stephen Harris, Bonnie Belair 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. Petitioner is requesting a Variance from parking and a Special Permit to change an existing nonconforming use for the property located at 91-95 Bridge Street located in a B-1 zone. • 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. • C1CLE1 Y ill- SALEM RK . ;MA • DECISION ON THE PETITION OF JORDAN CASTRO REQUESTING A SPECIAL 'S LLM PERMITNARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 91-95 BRIDGE STREET B-1 page two 1001 MAY The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the '4 A 43 hearing and after reviewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. The petitioner is seeking a variance from the required parking and a Special Permit to change a nonconforming use. 2. Plans were submitted showing the changes and proposed parking areas. 3. Concerns were raised about the parking issues. 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 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 and Variance is denied. / Variance & Special Permit Denied April 30, 2003 Richard Dionne Board of Appeals • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JORDAN CASTRO REQUESTING A VARIANCE/SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 91-95 BRIDGE STREET B-1 page four 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. C-) M :o _ NN t CD D mz w .¢o CITY- OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS CITY OF SALEM, MA BOARD OF APPEAL CL'ERK'S OFFICE }� 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR •` SALEM, MA 01970 • sy-1- s TEL. (978) 745-9595 Y ' P' FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. .1003 :JUL -9 A 4 I9 MUMSION OF THE PETITION OF JOHN JERMYN REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12 BUENA VISTA AVENUE R-1 A hearing on this petition was held June 25, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair, Nicholas Helides and Joseph Burbeau. 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 Variances from lot width and frontage to allow parcel to be subdivided to form 2 lots for the property located at 12 Buena Vista Avenue 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. Attorney Scott Grover, 222 Essex Street in Salem appeared and represented the petitioner. 2. A petition was submitted with 10 names in favor of the petition. 3. Jeffrey Sano of 5 Buena Vista Ave spoke in favor but had concerns about the possibility of blasting on the site. 4. The granting of this variance would allow for the installation of a cul de sac, as oposed to the connection of his paper street at both ends, thus forming a cut through that is opposed by the neighborhood. • 5. There was no opposition to this petition. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JOHN JERMYN REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12 BUENA VISTA AVENUE R-1 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 construction shall be done as per the 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. Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained. 6. Petitioner shall obtain proper street numbering from Assessors Office and shall display said numbers 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 and the Conservation Commission. 8. That any construction done on this site strictly adhere to the City's Ordinances regarding allowed times during which construction can be conducted. Variance Granted Joseph Barbeau • June 25, 2003 Board of Appea �s��S i 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 Ciry - BOARD OF APPEAL CL ERk,`'n" ' �,'tf 1 20 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR `S WICI A I� Via. SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAx (978) 740-9846 '1��I STANLEY J. YOR MAYOR JR. AUS 26 A 34 DECISION ON THE PETITION OF DAVID SAIIA REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 A BUFFUM STREET I A hearing on this petition was held on August 20, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Richard Dionne Nicholas Helides, Stephen Harris, Joan Boudreau 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. Petitioner requests a Special Permit to extend a non-conforming use from a single family to a two family dwelling for the property located at 7A Buffum Street located in a I 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 DAVID SAIA REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7A BUFFUM STREET I page two 1. Petitioner appeared on the July 16, 2003 meeting and presented his plans and background of the property. 2. The Board of Appeals requested a parking plan and had the petitioner come back to the next meeting. 3. Plans were presented showing the proposed parking plan. . 4 Discussion was held to determine a limitation to the total number of registered and inspected vehicles permitted to be parked on site. 5. The petitioner requested a limit of 20 cars. The Board determined that the request would completely cover the site with vehicles. 6. Resident John Pelosi of 2 Walter Street commented that the city should not allow uninspected vehicles to be parked on the premises. He further commented that making a restriction based on registered vehicles would allow a loophole. 7. The Board limited the number of registered and inspected vehicles to 14, parked outside of the building structure. 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 requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and safety shade Strictly adhered to. n �� 3. All construction shall be done per plans and dimensions submitted. • )> 4. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction. D nr.. Z- D • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF DAVID SAIA REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7A BUFFUM STREET I page three 5. Exterior finishes of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing structure. 6. Petitioner shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy. 7. Petitioner shall obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to the Planning Board. 8. Maximum of 14 currently registered and inspected vehicles allowed to be parked at the exterior on site at any point in time. Special Permit Granted / 'August 20, 2003 Nicholas Helides �C�A 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. 0 C') a � N � • �`i' D C/�� �Y LO M CITY OF SALEM, MASSA CHUSETWr-Y OF-SALE.M.. MA BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S'OF�10E 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • l�``�_� SALEM, MA 01970 mHa�P TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 ;100�;•JAN, I lb-),P ' -46 STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. ' MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF DARLENE GALLIEN REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 130 CANAL STREET I A hearing on this petition was held January 15, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Bonnie Belair, Nicholas Helides, Stephen Harris 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 Variances from side setback, rear setback and lot coverage to construct a 25' x 55' addition for the property located at 130 Canal Street located in an I 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. Darlene Gallien, owner of North Shore Fruit Basket appeared with her husband and presented their plans for the addition 2. Petitioner request variances from side setback, rear setback and lot coverage to construct a 25' x 55' addition for storage. Plans and pictures were submitted. 3. Two abutters, Dr. Freedman, owner of Hawthorne Animal Hospital and John Adams property owner of 103 Canal Street appeared and showed their support of this petition. • 4. There was no opposition to this petition. DECISION OF THE PETITION OF DARLENE GALLIEN REQUESTING VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 130 CANAL STREET I 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 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. All construction shall be done as per plans submitted and approved by the Building Commissioner. 5. A Certificate of Inspection shall be obtained. 7 VARIANCE GRANTED JANUARY 15, 2003 Stephen Harris / �G�\ Board of Appeal 1 J • 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 owntr of record or is recorded and noted on the owner's Certificate of Title. Board of Appeal • CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS CITY OF SALEM. MA �- BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • ` ';\\ ��a SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. A01 -MAR -4 P I: 59 . MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF PEABODY ESSEX MUSEUM REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT CHARTER ST., WASHINGTON SQ. AND BROWN STREET B-5 A hearing on this petition was held February 19, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, Stephen Hams, Nicholas Helides 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 to allow the free-standing signs within the Urban Renewal District to allow more than one sign on a lot and to the "signage are" square footage for signage allowed for the property located at Charter St, Washington Sq. and Brown 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 the Peabody Essex Museum, a nonprofit cultural arts museum whose extensive campus in downtown Salem features significant historic buildings and noteworthy modern additions, including a new wing to be opened in June. Joseph Correnti, Esq. represented the museum in a public hearing of the Zoning Board of Appeals in January and February of 2003. 2. The Museum's proposed signage has three separate elements. They seek to construct three freestanding 25 ft. metal poles and banners at the Charter Street entrance to the • Museum, and two 3.9 ft. freestanding directional signs in the pedestrian walkway between Charter and Liberty Streets. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF PEABODY ESSEX MUSEUM REQUESTING VARIANCES FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT CHARTER ST, WASHINGTON SQ. AND BROWN STREET B-5. page two 3. The Museum's signage plan reflects a considered effort to create excitement about the galleries and exhibits, to draw and direct visitors to the Museum entrance and to highlight the magnificent new architectural design. Although the proposed banner signs are larger than most signage on the pedestrian walkway, they have been placed where they will not obstruct views of historic features of the Museum architecture and scaled to for the Museum's Essex Street fagade. 4. Public comment at the January meeting centered on objections to signage that has Been dropped from the Museum plan. At the February meeting support for the banner poles was voiced by Deborah Greel, director of the Salem Main Streets initiative and by Bonnie Smith, an historic consultant for the Museum. 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 construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted and approved by the Building Commissioner. 3. Petitioner shall obtain approval from all City Boards or Commission having jurisdictions including, but not limited to, the Planning Board. Variance Granted /y February 19, 2003 • Nina Cohen Board of Appeal J 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 • • C�rY eco I (—ITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS C4 Or BOARD OF APPEAL SQ4�M • � 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR /C Q SALEM, MA 01970 IDOI. y�Mmem�e TEL. (978) 745-9595qp FAx (978) 7400-9846846 Nil?2(� STANLEY J. VICZ, -1R. MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF WILLIAM & FRANCESCA KORACH REQUESTING AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 33 CHESTNUT STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held Marchl9, 2003 meeting with the following Board Members were present: Nina Cohen Chairman, Stephen Harris, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belair 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. At the request of the petitioner's William & Francesca Korach, the Salem Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant leave to withdraw this petition without prejudice requesting an Administrative Appeal for the property located at 33 Chestnut Street located in a R-2 zone. GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE MARCH 19, 2003 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 .go CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHusO }T r SALEM.-MA. BOARD OF APPEAL CLE'RK'S OFFICE Z _ 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR r SALEM, MA 01 970 '• TEL. 1978) 745.9595 FAX (978) 740.9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. �3001'OV25 P 2=38 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ANDREW LYELL REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 40 COLUMBUS AVENUE R-1 A hearing on this petition was held November 19, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Stephen Harris, Nicholas Helides and Bonnie Belier. 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 for the renovation of an upstairs bathroom for the property located at 40 Columbus 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. The Petitioner, Andrew Lyell was requesting a Variance for the side setback requirements to allow a second floor bathroom to be expanded to within 5 feet 6 inches of the property line instead of the 10 feet that is required. 2. The second floor addition will extend from the second floor and not from the ground therefore the original floor print of the existing structure will not change. 3. There was no opposition to this petition. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ANDREW LYALL REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 40 COLUMBUS 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. 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 requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 3. All construction shall be done as per plans submitted and approved by the Building Commissioner. 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 19, 2003 Stephen Harris Board of Appeal Member • 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 • • ���oauint'o CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETT!tIT1y BOARD APPEAL ? . 120 WASHHINGTTONOSTREET, 3RD FLOOR yLCRn 0 OFA OF SALffjkj �`'MA o SALEM, 01 970 C TEL. (978)) 7 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 MAYOR bAY 4 , STANLEY J. VICZ, JR. 14 q 9' 4 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JOSEPH PARSHLEY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16 CONNORS ROAD R-1 A hearing on this petition was held April 30, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman„ Stephen Harris, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair 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 New 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 second floor addition for the property located at 16 Connors Road located in an R-I 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. The petitioner appeared and represented himself at the hearing. 2. Plans were submitted showing the addition 3. A petition was submitted with 3 names of abutters in favor of this petition. 4. There was no opposition to this petition. • CITY OF.SALEMMA CLERH',S OF66E DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JOSEPH PARSHLEY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16 CONNORS ROAD R-1 page two 1007 MAY 14 A 9' 44 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 construction shall be done as per the 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 April 30, 2003 / )iichardDionne SC"� 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. C') Board of Appeal g rn o t cr D 3 .9 fnn� t • v4co".1 o CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUS91TW5F SALEM, MA �® BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE A 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAx (978) 740-9846 1003 MAR 31 A 10: 41 STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. MAYOR DECISION ON THE PETITION OF GRIFFIN & LESSARD ARCHITECT REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 13 COUSIN STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held on March 19, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Nicholas Helides, Stephen Harris, Bonnie Belair and Joseph Barbeau Jr. 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 use per Section 9-4 and 5-2 of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to allow existing Social Club to be converted to 5 residential units and a Variance for two additional curb cuts to facilitate tenant parking for the property located at 13 Cousins 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 GRIFFIN & LESSARD ARCHITECT REQUESTING . A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 13 COUSIN STREET R-2 pagetwo 1. Richard Griffin and Paul Lessard appeared and represented the petition. Plans were shown showing the proposed townhouses. 2. Opposition to this project was based mostly on parking concerns, the additional curb cuts were of particular distain. Speaking in opposition were the following neighbors; Paul Crock, 8 Cousins St., with parking concerns, Mr. Marshall, 12 Allen St. trash and parking concerns, Janet Anderson , 30 English Sr. concerns with undeveloped.portion of property , Jorge Barzola, 18 Cousins St. parking concerns, Deb Bynoe, 10 Allen St., concerned with parking and density, Cynthia Sport, 12 Allen St., parking concerns. 3. The following neighbors spoke in favor of the change of use Kathy Harper, 3 Allen St., endorsed townhouses, parking concerns, Jeanne Higgins, 14 Cousins St, endorsed townhouses, Charles Clear, 8 '/2 Allen St. endorsed townhouses with concerns for the undeveloped portion of the property. 4. That no further development of this site could be considered without the further endorsement of this Board. 5. That this change of use would clearly be to the benefit of the neighborhood, and further that these planned townhouses being each containing three bedrooms would attract families as opposed to more tenants, which is in keeping with the demographics of the neighborhood, and more importantly preserves an historic building. 5. The variance for the two additional curb cuts was denied. 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. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF GRIFFIN & LESSARD REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 13 COUSINS STREET R-2 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 be obtained a building permit before starting any construction. 5. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained.. 6. Petitioner shall obtain approval from any City Board of Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Planning Board. 7. Petitioner shall obtain proper street numbering for the Assessors Office and display Said numbers as to be visible from the street. n SPECIAL PERMIT GRANTED Q 0.(G � .2 MARCH 19, 2003 «�JJJ seph 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. • eco CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEM. MA 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE SALEM, MA 01970 q TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY MAYOR ASROVICZ, JR. YO1.2003 JUL 30 A 9: 1 b DECISION OF THE PETITION OF SPIROS FLOMP REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2 DALTON PARKWAY R-2 A hearing on this petition was held July 16, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair, Nicholas Helides 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 New in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting Variances from rear yard setback to construct a 3 x 16 addition for the property located at 2 Dalton Parkway 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. The petitioner appeared and represented himself at the hearing. 2. Plans were submitted showing the proposed addition. 3. Councillor Joan Lovely spoke in favor and a letter was sent from Councillor Leonard O'Leary supporting this petition. 4. There was no opposition to this petition. • CITY OF SALEM, MA CLERK'S OFFICE • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF SPIROS FLOMP REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2 DALTON PARKWAY R-2 .1001 JUL 30 A 9: I b 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 construction shall be done as per the 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 Stephen Hams July 16, 2003 Board of Appeal J • CITY OF SALEM. MA CLERK'S OFFICE 1003 JUL 30 A 9: 1 b 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 • • CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY COFy ScALN�.I o e 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR y{^E ^•J � ' " • SALEM, MA O 1970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740.9846 - STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. .1081-MAY - I R tp Itq MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF WENDY SCHAFLANDER REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 328 ESSEX STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held April 30, 2003 meeting with the following Board Members were present: Nina Cohen Chairman, Stephen Harris, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair 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. At the request of the petitioner, the Salem Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant leave to withdraw this petition without prejudice requesting a Special Permit for the property located at 328 Essex Street located in a R-2 zone. GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE APRIL 30, 2003 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 �o CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS c BOARD OF APPEAL , CITY OF SAL" h 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERii .&i0FFIEE: SALEM, MA 01970 • TEL. (978) 745.9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 ]�t STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. 1LI003:OFG)3I PW'[o�09 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF KATI OLSON REQUESTING A VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 153 FORT AVENUE B-1 A hearing on this petition was held December 17, 2003, with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Stephen Harris, Richard Dionne, 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.a Special Permit and Dimensional Variances from lot coverage and parking to expand a non-conforming structure for the property located at 153 Fort Avenue located in a B-1 zone. 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 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 KATI OLSON REQUESTING A VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 153 FORT AVENUE B-1 page two The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented, and after reviewing the plans makes the following findings of fact: 1. The Petitioner Kati Olson appeared and represented herself at the hearing. 2. Plans were submitted showing the proposed project The Petitioner would like to expand the structure from a 1 story to 2 '/2 stories and construct a stair tower on the rear of the property 3. In support of the petition was Shaun Clark of 141 Fort Ave., Ed Mederios of 4 '/2 Lowell Street, Jennie Ventura of 4 '/2 Lowell Street, Frank Pierce of 75 Columbus Ave. 4. Opposed to the petitioner's plans was Donald Moore of 155 Fort Avenue. He was opposed due to the size of the project would block out light to his property next door. He also has a problem with the parking issues. 5. Concerns were raised about the sewer lines at the property. The City Engineer was contacted after the last meeting about 151-153 Fort Ave • 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. DECISION OF THE PETITION OF KATI OLSON REQUESTING A VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 153 FORT AVENUE B-1 page three 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. Petition shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained. 7. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board of Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Planning Board and the City Engineer. Special Permit & Variance Granted December 17, 2003 2p� eph Barbeau Board of Appeal 111 • 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 SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OAF SALE-&M, A 3 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CE'ER#t�'S ©Ff+'IEE SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 • FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. , 2003 SEP 18 A 10: 55 ' MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JAYMIN FAMILY TRUST REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 18 FOSTER STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held September 17, 2003 meeting with the following Board Members were present: Nina Cohen Chairman, Stephen Harris, Bonnie Belair, 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. At the request of the petitioner Mardie Goldberg the Salem Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant leave to withdraw this petition without prejudice requesting a Variance for the property located at 18 Foster Street located in a R-2 zone. GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE September 17, 2003 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 c BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALE'M..MA 5I 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CL-ERK'S OFFICE t �Ro SALEM, MA 01970 aTEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. :1003 OCT - I A 8: 43 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF RICHARD & JANEY BEAUREGARD REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6 FLYNN STREET R-1 A hearing on this petition was held September 17, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Stephen Harris, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belier 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 construct a second level for the property located at 6 Flynn 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 Mr.Beauregard appeared and represented himself at the hearing. 2. The plans were submitted showing the proposed addition. 3. A petition was submitted with 9 names in support of the petition. 4. There was no opposition to this petition. . • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF RICHAED & JANEY BEAUREGARD REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6 FLYNN 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. All construction shall be done as per plans submitted and approved by the Building Commissioner. 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 SEPTEMBER 17, 2003 seph Barbeau �C�<``� Board of Appeal Mem er • 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 • • eco CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHusCtF'Y$1F SALEM. MA BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE 3 e 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • , SALEM, 01 970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 1001 MAY 28 A ID 38 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF SUSAN CAYOUETTE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 20 HARDY STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held May 21, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair, 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 number of stories to construct third floor dormer for the property located at 20 Hardy 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. The petitioner appeared and represented herself at the hearing. 2. Plans were submitted showing the proposed addition 3. To expand the living space available to her family, petitioner seeks to add a dormer, increasing the number of stories without adding to the footprint of the overall height of the building. 4. Robert Shea of Morning Glory Bed and Breakfast was present at the hearing and view the proposed plans. • 5. There was no opposition to this petition. DECISION OF THE PETITION OF SUSAN CAYOUETTE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 20 HARDY STREET R-2 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 construction shall be done as per the 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 May 21; 2003 ✓ ,M a ' /`�i'�Ci�\ Nina Cohen, Chadman J 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 • 6�got�,r CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS CITY OF SALEM. MA g� �dL X44, BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE - 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR t� BSc' SALEM, MA 01970 •" 9Bq R` TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 1003 JUL 21 A II: 3 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR DECISION ON THE PETITION OF ROBERT SHEA REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 22 HARDY STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held on July 16, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Nicholas Helides, Stephen Harris, Bonnie Belair 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. Petitioner requests a Special Permit to reduce the (4) four guest bedrooms of Bed & Breakfast to a (3) three room tourist home for the property located at 22 Hardy 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 ROBERT SHEA REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 22 HARDY STREET R-2 page two 2007 JUL 21 A 11: 31 1. Petitioner Robert Shea appeared and represented himself at the hearing. 2. Mr. Shea was granted a Variance in 1996 to allow a 4-room tourist home. 3. Due to slow business and financial reasons, petitioner would like to reduce the number of rooms from 4 guest rooms to 3 guest rooms. 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 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 requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and safety shall be Strictly adhered to. 3. All construction shall be done per plans and dimensions submitted. 4. Petitioner shall not have more than 3 guest rooms. Special Permit Granted VV July 16, 2003 Bonnie Belair Csc�� Board of Appeal • CITY OF SALEM, MA CLERK'S OFFICE �IIII�II A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNINGIRpppp&WD�hcrA 11: 31 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 SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS CITY OF SALEM. MA BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE . `-' 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR �tX SALEM, MA 01970 '�q���rvacA�r TEL. (978) 745-9595 pn FAX (978) 740-9848 1001 JAN Ib P 14 b 1 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF MANUEL RAYMOND REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 13 HARROD STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held January 15, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Bonnie Belair, Nicholas Helides, Stephen Harris 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 Variance to add a 3d story addition for the property located at 13 Harrod 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 appeared and presented his plans to the Board. 2. Petitioner stated that the home would remain a single family. The third floor would add 2 bedrooms for his family. 3. City Councillor Mike Bencal spoke in favor of the petition. 4. The owner of 48 Phillips Street, which abuts the subject property, presented his concerns regarding water run off form the changed roof structure and closeness of existing structures and structural concerns. • 5. The Building Commissioner addressed both concerns of the aforesaid abutter, indicating no concerns with either. DECISION OF THE PETITION OF MANUEL RAYMOND REQUESTING VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 13 HARROD 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 fhe 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. All construction shall be done as per plans submitted and approved by the Building Commissioner. 5. A Certificate of Inspection shall be obtained. 6. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction. VARIANCE GRANTED JANUARY 15, 2003 Nicholas Helides CSC��J 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 • �ouw CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEM, MA 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE �Ro SALEM, MA 01970 • ��'�9g TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 11003 MAY -2 A 10: 4S MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF RIDGESIDE REALTY LLC REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED A 209 HIGHLAND AVENUE AND FIRST STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held April 30, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Richard Dionne, Stephen Harris, Bonnie Belier 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 from minimum lot area per building, Variance from one building per lot and Variance from maximum height of fence and boundarywalls for the property located at 209 Highland Ave and First Street located in an R-21 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 Ridgeside Realty LLC is in the process of acquiring a 4.7acre parcel on First St at Highland Ave. for Phase 11 of a residential building project that was recently completed across the street. The project will consist of four mid-rise mulit-family dwellings with a total of 108 one and two bedroom units. 2. The proposed multi-family project has the full support of the City of Salem Planning Board. By action of the Salem City Council on March 13, 2003, the site was rezoned to R-3, multi-family district. Adequate parking will be provided on site; therefore petitioner requires only the following variances: a variance from minimum lot area per dwelling unit, a variance to allow more than one building • per lot, and a variance from maximum height of fence and boundary walls. CITY OF SALEM. MA CLERK'S OFFICE DECISION OF THE PETITION OF RIDGESIDE REALTY LLC REQUE,�IING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 209 HIGHLAND Av€�Udt4tA11= PTA jR 45 STREET R-3 page two 3. Support for the petitioner's project was urged by Ward 3 City Councillor Joan Lovely, who complimented the developer for have created a first class housing development in Salem and for continuing to invest in the City. A letter from Mayor Stanley Usovicz was read into the record showing support for this project. There was no opposition. 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. All construction shall be done as per plans submitted and approved by the Building Commissioner. 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 shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy. 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. 8. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction • including, but not limited to, the Planning Board. CITY OF SAUMaMA CLERK'S OFFICE 1003 MAY -2 A ID 45 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF RIDGESIDE REALTY LLC REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 209 HIGHLAND AVENUE AND FIRST STREET R-3 page three VARIANCE GRANTED APRIL 30, 2003 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 MASSACHUSET `$( 'SALEM- M BOARD OF APPEAL CICLE K OFFICE A 3 0, 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR' • ` �� �ra SALEM, MA 01970 s TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. - t 00)-;OCT I. A-8: %3 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF.KELLY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP, INC. REQUESTING A VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 347 HIGHLAND AVENUE, BPD A hearing on this petition was held September 17, 2003, with the following Board Members present; Nina Cohen, Chairman, Nicholas Helides, Stephen Harris, 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 is requesting a Special Permit and Variance in order to alter the non- conforming use and structure of the premises at 347 Highland Avenue, Salem, Mass. by constructing an addition to the front of the building with a front yard set back of 40± feet; an addition to the left side of the building, which conforms to current dimensional requirements; and additions to the right side of the building with a side yard of 2.8± feet and 25.8± feet respectively. The property is situated in the Business Park Development District. • The provision of 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 Appeals 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 change, 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, Special Permit requests 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 land, 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 dIS[1iC[ or the Ordinance. v • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF KELLY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP REQUESTING A VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 347 HIGHLAND AVENUE BPD page two The Board of Appeals, after careful consideration of the evidence presented, and after reviewing the submitted site plan makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner, Kelly Automotive Group, Inc. is a Massachusetts Corporation that owns and operates a car dealership business known as "Kelly Honda" at 347 Highland Avenue, Salem, Mass. The petitioner and the principal owner, Mr. Brian Kelly, were represented at the hearing by Attorney Athan A. Vontzalides of 27 Lowell Street, Peabody, 2. Petitioner presented a site plan prepared by Meridian Associates, Inc. entitled "Plot Plan of land Located in Salem, Massachusetts, prepared for Kelhon Realty Trust, Scale: 1" = 40', dated July 16, 2003 consisting of one sheet. 3. Attorney Vontzalides explained that the current use of the property as a car dealership is a legally existing non-conforming use, and that • the existing building is also a legally existing non-conforming building with respect to its front yard set back and right side yard. He further explained that the existing building is old and outdated, and as a result the petitioner desires to perform a total interior and exterior renovation to the building. 4. Attorney Vontzalides explained that the front portion of the building will be demolished and rebuilt as a new sales room. The new sales room will remain the same size as before, but will have a new entrance way which slightly protrudes out from the front of the building which will require additional variance relief. 5. Petitioner is also proposing to construct a canopy style addition to,the left side of the building which will conform to the current dimensional requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. This addition will be a drive through service area designed to protect patrons from adverse weather conditions, and will contain new office space above the canopy. • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF KELLY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP, INC. REQUESTING A VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 347 HIGHLAND AVENUE. BPD 6. The Board was further informed that the Petitioner desires to construct two small additions to the right side of the building. The first addition is a canopy structure which will create a designated delivery area designed to protect customers and new vehicles from adverse weather conditions at the time of purchase and delivery. The second addition is directly behind the proposed canopy. It will contain approximately 340 square feet of area and be used as additionall office space in connection with the new sales room. Lastly, an approximately 3,500 square foot addition will be constructed to the rear of the building for expansion of the service department. Attorney Vontzalides stated that the existing building already contains a nominal right side yard, which side yard abuts a cliff of ledge resulting in the Petitioner's property being at a much lower elevation than the abutting property. As a result, allof the additions can be constructed without having any adverse impact to the most immediate abutter, or to any of the surrounding abutters. 7. Attorney Vontzalides further explained that due to the location of the existing building, it is impossible to perform these improvements without variance relief which creates a substantial hardship to the • petitioner. Because the request for relief is similar to the existing non-conforming set backs, the relief can be granted without any adverse effect to the surrounding area and without substantial derogation from the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. Furthermore, the proposal will result in a modern and more esthetic site, without increasing motor vehicular storage so as not to be substantially more detrimental to the existing area than the existing non-conforming fa ri lity. On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented at the hearing the Zoning Board of Appeals 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 requested is in harmony with the neighborhood and will promote the public health, safety. convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF KELLY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP, INC. REQUESTING A VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 347 HIGHLAND AVENUE, BPD Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeals 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 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. 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 or Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Planning Board. Special Permit and Variance Granted. September 17, 2003 /I/� C��s���� Nina. Cohen Chairman, Board of Appeals • 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��coxul i� CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUS T BOARD OF APPEAL %TTYS O.F SALE:�t::MA CLERK'S OFIR�F = gj 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR EE� SALEM, MA 01970 " • ,�' "" TEL. (978) 745-9595 Mms FAX (978) 740.9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. .'.2001:,JAN-21. P:, MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF THOMAS GILLIGAN JR. REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 HILLSIDE AVENUE R-1 A hearing on this petition was held January 15, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Bonnie Belair, Nicholas Halides, Stephen Harris 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 Variance from minimum lot size and minimum frontage to subdivide the property to create a separate lot for the property located at 7 Hillside 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. Attorney Scott Grover of 222 Essex Street appeared and represented the petitioner. 2. Petitioner would like to subdivide property to create a separate lot for sale. 3. Kevin O'Donnell, who would like to purchase the lot, would build a single-family dwelling. 4. City Councillor Mike Bencal spoke in favor of the petition. 5. Richard MacKinnon of 13 Hillside Ave also spoke in support of this petition. • CITY OF SALI;[� :MA CLERK'S OF E DECISION OF THE PETITION OF THOMAS GILLIGAN REQUESTING VAp� E FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 HILLSIDE AVENUE R-1 " [U� 4.21 P 3�,.I:I 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. All construction shall be done as per plans submitted and approved by the Building Commissioner. 4. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained. 5. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction. 6.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. 7. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board of Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Planning Board. VARIANCE GRANTED JANUARY 15, 2003 Con e Belair • Board of Appeal CITY oF.SAV #A CLERH'S '0 : k. 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 • Hca CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR ClT_Y OF -SALIEW :1A SALEM, MA 01970 CL.ERKI OWl`ff • �� TEL. (978) 745.9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR 1003OEC 30 P 2 Iq r DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MOFFAT REALTY TRUST REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 10 JEFFERSON AVENUE R-2 A hearing on this petition was held on December 17, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, 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 extend non-conforming retail use to the rear of the building for the property located at 10 Jefferson Avenue 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 0 DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MOFFAT REALTY TRUST REQUESTING A • SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 10 JEFFERSON AVENUE R-2 page two 1. Attorney Joseph Correnti of 63 Federal Street appeared and represented the petitioner. 2. Councillor Joan Lovely spoke in favor of the petition but with restricted retail hours of 10:00 p.m. closing and exclusion of restaurant service. 3: Councillor Joseph O'Keefe also.spoke in favor of the petition. 4. There was no opposition. 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 requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and safety shall be Strictly adhered to. 3. Petitioner shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy. 4. Petitioner shall obtain a Certificate of Inspection. 5. Restrict retail closing at 10:00 p.m. 6. Petitioner shall obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to the Planning Board. 7. Petitioner shall exclude restaurant use. 8. Petitioner shall obtain proper street numbering for the City's Assessors Office and • shall display said numbers to be visible from the street. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF MOFFAT REALTY TRUST REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 10 JEFFERSON AVENUE R-2 Special Permit Granted lichar December 17,2003 d 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 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 MASSACHUSETiTfOFSALEM. MA BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE gj 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR A � SALEM, MA O 1970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. �,IOOJ`MAY -2 A la. 45 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF MOFFAT REALTY TRUST REQUESTING A VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 10 JEFFERSON AVENUE R-2 A hearing on this petition was held April 30, 2003, with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Stephen Harris, 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. Petitioner is requesting a Special Permit to extend a non-conforming use and Variances to allow two buildings on one lot and from minimum distance between buildings for the property located at 10 Jefferson Avenue located in a R-2 zone. The provisions the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to the request for a Special Permit is section 5-3 Q), 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 CITY OF SALEM..MA CLERK'S OFFICE • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF MOFFAT REALTY TRUST REQUESTING A VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 10„100) MAY -2 A ID 45 JEFFERSON AVENUE R-2 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 Santo DeFrancesco is a Trustee of Moffat Realty Trust, which owns a property at 10 Jefferson Ave. in an R-2 district. The property, which formely housed the Surette Battery business, was redeveloped by the petitioner and now consists of a two-story brick building with retail shops on the first floor and professional office space on the second floor. Both the retail and office businesses on site have thrived, and additional office space is needed to accommodate the growth of the office uses. 2. Because of the demand for addition office space, Mr. DeFrancesco seeks to build a second office building perpendicular to the existing structure. The proposed building, a single story structure of 1800 sq. feet, will be accessible from the Winthrop Street side of the property, but will be separated from the existing building by a walkway. The proposed new building will house 1 or 2 office units. 3. Variances are required to allow two building on one lot, and to allow two buildings to • be constructed within 6 feet of each other. A special permit is also required to extend the nonconforming office use in the R-2 district. No variance is required for parking, as sufficient.off-street parking exists on site. 4. Two abutters, Mary Spang of 75 Hathorne and Mary Urbanski of 77 Hathorne, Appeared in support of the petition. Both said that parking is a problem on their street but they doubted that the proposed addition would impact their parking situation. Ward 3 City Councillor Joan Lovely appeared in support of the petition and reported that she was aware of no opposition to the proposed addition. 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. CITY OF SALEM. MA • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF MOFFAT REALTY TRUST REQUESTING RLERWS OFFICE VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 10 JEFFERSON AVENUE R-2. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 4-0, to grant the r2TPf4f MAY -2 A ID 45 ' 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 Occupancy is to be obtained. 6. Exterior finishes of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing structure and building shall be clad in brick. 7. Petitioner shall obtain proper street numbering and shall display said numbering as • to be visible from the street. Special Permit & Variance Granted April 30, 2003 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. CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTSCITY OF SALEM MA BOARD OF APPEAL CLERX'S OFF'tGE 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR X11 ° SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF FIELDBROOK ASSOCIATES LP REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 193 JEFFERSON AVENUE & 10 COLONIAL ROAD I A hearing on this petition was held January 15, 2003 meeting with the following Board Members were present: Nina Cohen Chairman, Stephen Harris, 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. At the request of the petitioner's Attorney Scott Grover, the Salem Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant leave to withdraw this petition without prejudice requesting a Variance from lot size, front setback, side setback and lot width to subdivide two lots the property located at193 Jefferson Avenue and 10 Colonial Road located in an I zone. • GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE JANUARY 16, 2003 all - 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. o CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF'S'ALrisf;tHA ® 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERkl-OFFI•CE • ! SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745.9595 FAX (978) 740.9846 �{ STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. L',ZU01`KI222r-p',.2tf45 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF MIRASH BEGI REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 260 JEFFERSON AVENUE B-1 A hearing on this petition was held December 17, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Stephen Harris, Richard Dionne, Joseph Barbeau and Bonnie Belier. 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 setbacks to allow construction of an addition for the property located at 260 Jefferson Avenue located in a 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. The Petitioner is requesting a Variance from side setback to allow an addition to enclose the rear entrance to the property at 260 Jefferson Ave. The side setback would be S feet instead of the 10 feet. 2. The abutter to the right side of the petitioner a Mr. Lysac was opposed to the petition because he felt the addition was to close to his property and that it was built without a permit. 3. Upon approval of the petition the owner will apply for a permit and bring the addition into compliance with the State Building Codes. • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF MIRASH BEGI REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 260 JEFFERSON AVENUE B-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. 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 in favor and 1 in opposition 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 construction shall be done as per plans submitted and approved by the Building Commissioner. 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 the existing structure. Variance Granted December 17, 2003 j�'/u2C-f Stephen Harris Cs� Board of Appeal, Member • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF MIRASH BEGIREQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 260 JEFFERSON AVENUE B-1 page three 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 • �a CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS CC YOF BOARD OF APPEAL �F/Q SiQ el ,lam a1 r e 120 WASHINGTON MA 0197ORD FLOOR SALEMOFF/CF�� Tsai.—r 9��'`nNeW�e FAX (978) 740-9846 -TEL. (978) 745-9595 j���Mgg2 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 4 ^ MAYOR ry 26 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF LAFAYETTE LLC REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 245 LAFAYETTE STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held Marchl9, 2003 meeting with the following Board Members were present: Nina Cohen Chairman, Stephen Harris, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belair 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. At the request of the petitioner's Attorney William Quinn, the Salem Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant leave to withdraw this petition without prejudice requesting a Special Permit for expansion of nonconforming use to allow the addition of 4 units and a Variance from parking requirements for the property located at 245 Lafayette Street located in a R-2 zone. • GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE MARCH 19, 2003 (SC- 1 ,/1 SC- � Nlna 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��¢o CITY OF SALEM9MASSACHUSET TRY OF SALEM. MA l BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE art 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR c SALEM, MA 01970 • ` . TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 1003 JUL 21 A IIS 31 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. . MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF FRED & LIDIA NEMIROWSKY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 327 LAFAYETTE STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held July 16, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair, Nicholas Helides 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 New in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting Variances to allow a 3rd unit for the property located at 327 Lafayette 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. The petitioners appeared and represented themselves at the hearing. 2. Plans were submitted showing the changes and proposed scale of the project. 3. Lot coverage will be no more than 30% and 8 parking spaces will be provided. 4. There was no opposition to this petition. • CITY OF SALEM, MA CLERK'S OFFICE • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF FRED & LIDIA NEMIROVSKY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 327 LAFAYETTE ST1TJR221 A 11: 31 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 construction shall be done as per the 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. Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained. 6. Aluminum siding to be removed and rear yard to be cleared., nn Variance Granted Richard Dionne July 16, 2003 Board of Appeal • CITY OF SALEM. MA CLERK'S OFFICE • .2003 JUL 21 A 11: 31 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 • ow CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETITF OF SALEM. MA BOARD OF APPEALCLERK'S OFFICE 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • � �\ , j� SALEM, MA 01970 TFL. (978) 745-9595 9ep�''m+B�N FAx (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 1001 FEB 20 P S. 05 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF CARLOS & MARY CORRIEA REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 31 MARLBOROUGH ROAD R-,1 A hearing on this petition was held February 19, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Richard Dionne, Nicholas Helides, Stephen Harris 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 Variance from rear yard setback to construct an 18 x 22 addition for the property located at 31 Marlborough 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. The petitioner appeared and represented himself at the hearing. 2. Plans were shown showing the proposed addition. 3. Petitioner seeks a relief from the rear yard setback. 4. Councillor O'Leary spoke in favor of the petition. 5. There was no opposition to this petition. • CITY OF SALEM, MA CLERK'S OFFICE • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF CARLOS & MARY CORRIEA REQUESTING VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 31 MARLBOROUGH ROA fEB 20 P S. 05 _ 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. All construction shall be done as per plans submitted and approved by the Building Commissioner. 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 FEBRUARY 19, 2003 /1 NicholasHelides Board of Appeal • I co CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC PROPERTY DEPARTMENT • j. . �. OF THIS DECISION HAg�t%21MWT 13��?kAtgAING BOARD AND ms's` TY CLERK TEL. (978)745-9595 EXT. 380 9BciyMg FAX (978) 740-9846 . STANLEY .1. USg{q CW,fD fm this decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of the MAYOMassachusetts 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 G �J r� rn m W ::0o CD Vi> O D • �r r.. m3 O D • ¢o CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL r 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • � SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745.9595 FAX (978) 740.9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. n MAYOR ^' n--t mC3 o DECISION OF THE PETITION OF SUCHAND REDDY PINGLI REQUESTING A N NTD VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 11 1/.2 MASON STREET I oTn "^3 A hearing on this petition was held September 17, 2003 with the following Board cn�3 Members present: Nina Cohen, Stephen Harris, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belier and v Joseph Barbeau. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and others and notices of un 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 existing addition for the property located at 11 Y2 Mason Street located in an Industrial 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 Mr. Reddy appeared and represented himself at the hearing. 2. The plans were submitted showing the existing addition. 3. The addition has a setback of 7 1/2 feet instead of the required 10-foot setback. 4. There was no opposition to this petition. 5. 11/12 Mason is a legal 3 family dwelling. • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF SUCHAND REDDY PINGLI REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 11 Y2 MASON STREET I 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. All construction shall be done as per plans submitted and approved by the Building Commissioner. 4. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction. VARIANCE GRANTED SEPTEMBER 17, 2003 1 Bonnie Belair nnt-k Board of Appeal Me e C J 0 a of �o oil) oh. . • �c,t � 3 �3 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 0 a �y oti k35 0 co c o� �� cj 3 CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS CITY OF SAL A BOARD OF APPEAL '' o � GL�ERK'S 0 -,. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745.9595 fnn FAX (978) 740-9846 .NJ-MAY — j P STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. x.43 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ERIC EASLEY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 35 MASON STREET I A hearing on this petition was held April 30, 2003 meeting with the following Board Members were present: Nina Cohen Chairman, Stephen Harris, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair 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. 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 requesting a Variance for the property located at 35 Mason Street located in a R-2 zone. GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE . APRIL 30, 2003 Ninaa C 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 ycv��cU 11 CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEM. MA 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE SALEM, MA 01970 se TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. ,.1003 MAR 2l A ID 41 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF STEPHEN W. HALEY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 41 MASON STREET I A hearing on this petition was held March 19, 2003.with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Nicholas Helides, Stephen Harris, Bonnie Belier 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 from side and rear setbacks, parking and density requirements to construct an addition for the property located at 41 Mason Street located in an I 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 Stephen Haley owns and operates Crown Auto Supply, a wholesale auto parts business located at 45 Mason Street adjacent to the subject property. Several other businesses also operate at the 45 Mason Street property, and Mr. Haley currently holds a license to offers used cars for sale at 43 Mason Street. 2. Petitioner seeks to renovate a former tannery building at 41 Mason Street for commercial and light industrial use. The existing structure is nonconforming as to minimum lot area, frontage, front and side yard setbacks, and it does not offer sufficient off street parking to meet the requirements of the ordinance for commercial or industrial use. • 3. Architect Richard Griffin of 37 Turner Street, Salem, detailed the proposed renovation. A three story wood structure at the Mason St. property line is unsound and it will be demolished A single story brick structure behind the wood • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF STEPHEN HALELY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 41 MASON STREET i page two structure has been gutted and cleaned; it has been determined to be free of contamination arising from its former use. Mr. Haley proposes to construct commercial offices within the existing walls of the brick building and to create a new single story addition on the southeast corner of the property. The new space will be used for his existing business and for other commercial uses consistent with the business now operating in the adjacent properties. The new addition will have a 2- foot setback and a rear setback of 2 feet. The new space will be used for this existing business and for other commercial uses consistent with businesses now operating in the adjacent properties. . 4. Ward 5 City Councillor Mike Bencal reported that Mr. Haley met with neighbors in July 2002 to explain the project, and that the neighborhood was in favor of granting The variances. Eric Easley of 35 also voiced support for Mr. Haley's project Mason Street and Arthur Parent of 39 Mason 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 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 construction shall be done as per plans submitted and approved by the Building Commissioner. 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 shall obtain a Certificate of Inspection. DECISION OF THE PETITION OF STEPHEN HALEY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 41 MASON STREET I page three 7. Petitioner shall obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction including but not limited to the Planning Board. 8. No neon signs are to be used. 9. There shall be no outside storage. 10. There shall be no automotive repairs. 11. Hours of operation shall be between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. VARIANCE GRANTED MARCH 19, 2003 Nina Cohen, Chairman CSC�'`� 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 �oNn CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTL8TY OF SALEM, MA BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • ><� ��� SALEM, MA 01 970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 - STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. .1003 JUN -U F 2 19 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF WENDI MERCEDO REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 101 I/2 MASON STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held May 21, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, 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 New in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from side yard setback, rear setback and lot coverage to construct a 2 story addition for the property located at 101 I/2 Mason 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. The petitioner appeared and represented herself at the hearing. 2. Plans were submitted showing the proposed addition 3. The Salem Harbor CDC spoke in favor of this petition.. 4. There was no opposition to this petition. • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF WENDI MERCADO REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 101 '/2 MASON STREET R-2 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 4-0, 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 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 May 21, 2003 \ Bonnie Belair 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 • CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS CI]'y 120 WASHINGTONBO BOARD OSTREEPE 3RD FLOOR AL CL ERK,S F'CE ALEtl A SALEM, MA 01970 • TEL. (978) 745-9595 f STANLEY J. Y)OR VICZ, JR. FAX (978) 740-9846 '10D� SEP 23 P 71 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF BRADFORD SMIITH REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 45 MEMORIAL DRIVE R-1 A hearing on this petition was held September17, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Nicholas Helides, Joan Boudreau, Stephen Hams 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 New in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from side yard setback to construct a 17 x 21 addition and a 10 x 17 deck for the property located at 45 Memorial Drive located in an R-1 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. The petitioner is seeking a right setback of 2.4 feet instead of the required 10 feet in an R-1 zone. And a left side setback of 4.7 feet instead of the required 10 feet to build an addition for the property located at 45 Memorial Drive. . 2. Abutters from 47 & 48 Memorial Drive were in favor of the petitioner's request for the variances. Robert Hayes of 45 Memorial Drive was opposed because of the possible loss of ocean views that might take place if the addition were to be built. 3. Councillor Kevin Harvey spoke in favor of this petition. • CI rY OF • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF BRADFORD SMITH REQUESTING A CLERKS F,�E A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 45 MEMORIAL DRIVE R-1 page two 100) SEP 4. The Condo Association reprehensive spoke in favor of the petition but did have 23 P 3: 7 concems regarding the timeline of the construction and thoe hours of construction. Both issues were addressed to there satisfaction. 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 construction shall be done as per the 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. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Planning Board. Variance Granted Stephen ams • September 17, 2003 Board of Appea 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 N N� ' TP • o CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTSOITy OF SALEM. MA BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE 3 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR f 9 SALEM, MA 01970 • q TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 1003 NOV 20 P 3: 43 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ROBERT IDRESANO REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9 MOFFATT ROAD R-1 A hearing on this petition was held November 19, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Stephen Harris, Nicholas Helides and Bonnie Belier. 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 Section 7-12 to enclose an existing covered porch and also a Variance from Section 7-8 to allow a deck within 5 feet of the side setback for the property located at 9 Moffatt 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. The Petitioners spoke presenting plans and background of the property. 2. The Petitioners represented that they had contacted neighbors and obtained support for the petition. 3. There was no opposition to this petition. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ROBERT IDESANO REQUESTING A VARIANCE • FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9 MOFFATT 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. 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 requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. • 3. All construction shall be done as per plans submitted and approved by the Building Commissioner. 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 19,.2003 Nicholas Helides CS� � Board of Appeal Member • 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 r CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL 2 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • \11` , ��a. SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 g�N FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. C-7 MAYOR c �=•I DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ELROY HALFREY REQUESTING A oy VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 28 MOONEY ROAD R-2 A hearing on this petition was held August 20, 2003 with the following Board Members* present: Richard Dionne, Nicholas Helides, Joan Boudreau, Stephen Harris and JosephN Barbeau. 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 rear yard setback to construct a sunroom for the property located at 28 Mooney Road 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. The petitioner is seeking a Variance from rear yard setback to construct a sunroom over existing deck. The setback will be 26.8 feet instead of the required 30 feet. 2. Plans were submitted showing the proposed sunroom. 3. There was no opposition to this petition. • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ELROY HALFREY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 28 MOONEY ROAD R-1 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 construction shall be done as per the 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. Variance Granted an Boudreau /�C�, August 20, 2003 Board of Appeal ( �l 0 ti n cri C < CT • Cii Cr, D oD n iv "72 a 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 0 o _n a r� � rT; IV 7C or- CD Drl N r*i3 N Z> • CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS �g BOARD OF APPEAL 0 0 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • / SALEM, MA 01970 • TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 c-) STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. o �� MAYOR fn0 m -;KT DECISION ON THE PETITION OF NURY ESPINAL REQUESTING A VARIANCE FW 'f'� THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12 MT. VERNON STREET R-2 cr m D ') A hearing on this petition was held on September 17, 2003, with the following Board rrn:K Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Stephen Harris, Nicholas Helides, Joan v Boudreau and Joseph Barbeau. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and other :cn 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 add third unit to an existing 2 family for the property located at 12 Mt Vernon 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. Petitioner, Nury Espinal, owner of the property explained that the already had much or the work done to create a third floor unit to the property. The work was done without a building permit and she was before the Board to continue the project in a legal manner. She and her new contractor, Pat Pantapas made the following points. 2. She was told it was possible and legal to create a third unit when she purchased the property. There is currently only street parking for this address and they plan to create 3-car parking and also since Nury Espinal owner subject property, it would be possible to create more parking. 3. Ryan Robins of 11 Mr. Vernon St. cited that the historic nature of the neighborhood was being challenged as renters rather than owners have • occupied most multi -family homes. • DECISION ON THE PETITION OF NURY ESPINAL REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12 MT. VERNON STREET R-2 page two 4. A petition was submitted with 12 names in opposition to this petition. 5. The following individuals spoke in opposition to the petition citing safety issues, parking, emergency access and the existing situation with Ms, Espinal having child care in her basement, Donna Talbot 7 & 9 Mt. Vernon St, Joyce Morneau, 24 Winthrop St., Bob Jackson, 8 Mr. Vernon St., Bob Cole, 16 Mr. Vernon St. David Byors Councillor Joan Lovely and Councillor Kevin Harvey. 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 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 SEPTEMBER 17, 2003 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 o recorded in the South Essex Registry of Deeds and indexed under the name of the � C'J owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owners Certificate of Title. ,� y • AJ � Board of Appeal Q �3 `''3 i vb��onm CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY. IF SALEM. MA 3 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERKS OFFICE Iota SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. :200.3 JAN 29 A 11::00 MAYOR DECISION ON THE PETITION OF GABRIEL ROSSI, TRUSTEE REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 73 NORTH STREET BPD A hearing on this petition was held on January 15, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Nicholas Helides, Stephen Harris, 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 requests a Special Permit for extension of a nonconforming use and structure by construction of a 720 sq ft. addition within the rear and side setback resulting in a building lot coverage of 48%for the property located at 73 North Street located in a BPD 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 GABRIEL ROSSI, TRUSTEE REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 73 NORTH STREET BPD page two 1. Attorney George W. Atkins III, 59 Federal Street represented the petitioner, Gabriel Rossi. 2. Mr. Rossi is the owner of O'Rourke Brothers Memorial and would like to build a 24 ' x 30 ' addition for storage of materials. 3. Councillor Mike Bencal spoke in favor of the petition. 4. There was no opposition. 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 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 be obtained a building permit before starting any construction. 5. Exterior finishes of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing structure. 6. Petitioner shall obtain approval from any City Board of Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Planning Board. • SPECIAL PERMIT GRANTED Joan Boudreau JANURAY 15, 2003 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. • • Eco+ CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEM. MA g1 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE • �\ c-' SALEM, MA 01970 s9geR- TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR 100] SEP 25 A IIS 00 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF SALVATION ARMY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 93 NORTH ST & 5 MASON ST B-1 A hearing on this petition was held September17, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Nicholas Helides, Joan Boudreau, Stephen Harris 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 New in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from front and side yard setback to construct a new building for the property located at 93 North St. & 5 Mason Street located in a B-1 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, the Salvation Army of Massachusetts, Inc. seeks to demolish an older building and replace it with a larger facility at 93 North St. and 5 Mason St 2. The proposed facility will consist of a one-story building of 15, 000 sq. ft. with basement and adjacent parking lot. The building will be used along the North St. property line, within the North Street Entrance Corridor District for the City of Salem. Because the proposed allows for no front setback and for minimal side • setback, the petitioner seeks zoning relief for both dimensional variances. — DECISION OF THE PETITION OF SALVATION ARMY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 93 NORTH ST & 5 MASON STREET B-I page two 3. The site plan drawn by Scott Patrowicz of Patrowicz Land Engineering, provides for access from Mason Street to an 18-car parking lot at the rear of the building. Traffic flow in this rear lot will be one-way to allow visitors to deposit donation bags at a bin in the rear of the parking area, and the 18 parking spaces will be used by employees and visitors. The City's Planning Board will provide site plan review for the project. 4. Fred Gemer of Elliot & Associates Architects drew architectural plans for the new building. The plans were reviewed by members of the Historic Salem Inc., and by the Assistant City Planner for the City of Salem, who also met with petitioner's representatives. Historic Salem Inc. sent a letter expressing satisfaction with the design process, stating however that they were unable to review the proposed plans in time to formally approve the final proposal. 5. The project has the full support of Michael Banal, Ward 6 City Councilor and also was supported by Rich Blazo, an abutter at 92 North Street. • 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. v 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 dimension submitted and approved by the Building Commissioner. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF SALVATION ARMY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 93 NORTH STREET AND.5 MASON STREET B-I 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. Prior to obtaining a Building Permit, Petitioner shall obtain approval of the exterior design and exterior details of the building from the Design Director of the Salem Planning Department and the City Preservation Officer (currently the same person) who shall consult with Historic Salem, Inc. 6. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Planning Board. 7. Petitioner shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy. 8. Petitioner shall obtain proper street numbering for the City's Assessors Office and • shall display number so as to be visible from the street. Variance Granted , \ September 17, 2003 x� U, Nina Cohen, Chairman v 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 CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTSly OF ��6 ® BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'SALEM-E A 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • 1 a' SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 1007 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. FAX (978) 740-9846 `' MAY j4 .q (� 421 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF FLORA TONATHAT REQUESTING A VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 30 NORTHEY STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held April 30, 2003, with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Stephen Harris, Richard Dionne, 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 a Special Permit for a tourist home and a Variance from the number of stories to construct a third floor addition for the property located at 30 Northey Street located in a R-2 zone. The provisions the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to the request for a Special Permit is section 5-3 Q), 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 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 CITY OF SALEM: MA CLERK'S OFFFII��FF DECISION OF THE PETITION OF FLORA TONATHAT REQUESTING A VARIAf]CF • AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 30 NORTHEY STREET R-2 page two lUU) MAY 14 A 9. 43 , The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented, and after reviewing the plans makes the following findings of fact: 1. David Jaquith, Architect for the petitioner presented the plans to the Board. 2. Petitioner would like a Special Permit for a tourist home and Variance from the number of stories to construct a third floor addition. 3. Petitioner has plenty of parking for this petition. 4. A petition was submitted with 8 names in favor of the project. 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. Exterior finishes of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing Structure. 6. Petition will review the Special Permit for a tourist home in 3 years. • CITY CLERK S OFFS- A DECISION OF THE PETITION OF FLORA TONATHAT REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT AND VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT SO NORTHEY STREET R-2 Y 14 A page three 43 Special Permit & Variance Granted April 30, 2003 I n 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 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 • v6�coNOD,r� CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETITF, OF SALEM. MQ BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE 3 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR X SALEM, MA 01 970 • �s TEL. (978) 745-9595 ARoiy�ip� Fax (978) 740-9846 p f� O STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 100) JUL 28 P 2 4$ MAYOR DECISION ON THE PETITION OF DAVID AND PATRICIA KING REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM REQUIRED NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES TO CONVERT AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE INTO A TWO FAMILY RESIDENCE, FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 118 NORTH STREET(B-1). A hearing on this petition was held July 16, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairwoman; Steve Harris; Nick Helides; Richard Dionne; and Associate Members Bonnie Blair; and Joseph Barbeau. Notice of this 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, with an agreement to become the owner of the property, is requesting a Variance from the required number of parking spaces so as to convert this single family residence into a two family residence located at 118North Street. The property is located in an B-1 district. The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon finding by this board that: 1. 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 involved. 2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner. • 3. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district 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: 1. This request had been first presented at the Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting of June 25, 2003, at which time this matter was continued until the July 16, 2003, so as to allow the Kings address the following issues: A. Creation of a parking plan that was within the allowances as set forth in the Zoning Code, paying attention in particular to land ownership as stated in Section 7-3(b). B. Having said plan drawn up, showing all affected structures, access, parking spaces, and lot lines. 2. Further discussion included comments by the Board as to the general congestion of this neighborhood, and the proposed loss of green space. 3. At this meeting Ward 6 Counselor Mike Bencal spoke in opposition of this plan based on the issues of parking and congestion, lack of an easement, and questioned this use in a commercial area. 4. Also speakino in opposition was Stanley Mc Dermott, 30 Dearborn Street, with concerns about parking and congestion in this area. 5. A[ the meeting Of the Board on july 16, 2003 a letter was read Into the record from Mr. Bencal reiterating the issues of parking and congestion, and questioning the issue of hardship whereas this orooerty nas not as yet been purchased, though it is under agreement. • • DECISION ON THE PETITION OF DAVID AND PATRICIA KING REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM REQUIRED NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES TO CONVERT AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE INTO A TWO FAMILY FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 118 NORTH STREET B1 page two 6. At this meeting there was no other public comment. 7. Mr. King did object to the letter of Mr. Bencal on the following points; he had obtained an agreement of easement form his direct abutter, James Moriarty, and said he had discussed this with Mr. Bencal who then allegedly consented to the plan. 8. Mr. King also submitted a hand drawn plan as to the use of easement and parking layout. This however was not a Certified Plot Plan. 9. Mr. King did submit a copy of an agreement to grant an easement signed by both himself and Mr. Moriarty. 10. Discussion by the board considered the following points, lack of a Plot Plan, density, congestion, in-adequate space for proposed number of spaces, in-adequate driveway size (street opening). Also as pointed out by Building Commissioner Tom St. Pierre that as this residence is situated in a B-1 zone, a variance is ,not required for the transition to a two- family, it only becomes an issue when lack of parking is involved. On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows: • 1. The Variance requested can not 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. 2. The granting of this Variance requested will not promote the public health, safety, convenience, and welfare of the City's inhabitants and may not be granted in harmony with the neighborhood. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 2 for and 3 against to grant the Variance Requested; as four votes in favor are required for the granting of a variance, consequently the request for this variance has been denied. Variance Denied July 16, 2003 Decision written by: Associate Member, Joseph Barbeau V, • w 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 w • pow u CITY OF SALEMMASSAC"'ISFFrIFALEM. MA BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE '-' 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR fR SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (979) 740-9846 1Uil:MAR-2l.-,A-:10: A2 STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF CHARLES CONNELLY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 56 OCEAN AVENUE R-2 A hearing on this petition was held March 19, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman„ Stephen Harris, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belair 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 New in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from side yard setback to construct an 8 x 36 addition for the property located at 56 Ocean Avenue located in a R-2. 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. Brednan Whalen of Whalen Brothers LLC, appeared and represented the petitioner. Mr. Whalen is the designer and builder for the proposed addition. 2. The petitioner is requesting a side yard setback of 9 feet instead of the required 10 feet to construct an 8 x 36 addition. Plans were submitted showing the proposed addition. 3. There was no opposition to this petition. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF CHARLES CONNELLY REQUESTING VARIANCES FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 56 OCEAN AVENUR R-2 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 construction shall be done as per the 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. Petitioner shall obtain approval from all City Boards or Commission having jurisdictions including, but not limited to, the Planning Board. Variance Granted March 19, 2003 f� Stephen Hams Board of Appea % • A, COSY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEP: FILED WITH THE PLANNING 1-0.-^.RD 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 o CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF SALEM. MA CLERK'S OFFICE, 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • l . _ ,SALEM, MA 01970 . ,�fIINB TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (97B) 740.9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 1003 NOV 25 P 2. 38 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF LIONEL PELLETIER REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 173 OCEAN AVENUE WEST R-1 A hearing on this petition was held November 19, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Stephen Harris, Nicholas Helides and Bonnie Belier. 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 size and lot width to allow a single family dwelling to be built for the property located at 173 Ocean Avenue West 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 appeared and represented the petitioner's request to construct a new single family. Petitioner seeks a variance from lot size and lot width. 2. The plot plan was presented showing the lot the petitioner would like to build on. 3. There was no opposition to this petition. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF LIONEL PELLETIER REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 173 OCEAN AVENUE WEST 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. 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 requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 3. All construction shall be done as per plans submitted and approved by the Building Commissioner. 4. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction. 5. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained. 6. 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. 7. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Planning Board. Variance Granted November 19, 2003 Bonnie Be ai Board of Appeals ` `-J • 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 • • CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTSITY OF SALEM. MA BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE �1 r� 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 9ep� I- FAx (978) 740-9846 J001 -JUL - I P 3: Ob STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF RANDY WHITE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 94 ORCHARD STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held June 25, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair, 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 New in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A.. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from number of stories to construct a third floor dormer for the property located at 94 Orchard 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. The petitioner appeared and represented himself at the hearing. 2. Plans were submitted showing the changes and proposed scale of the project. 3. Staley McDermitt voiced concerns with the scale and lines of the dormer, and changers were submitted. 4. There was no opposition to this petition. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF,RANDY WHITE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 94 ORCHARD STREET R-2 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 construction shall be done as per the 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. Dormer shall be 12 feet by 29 feet. Variance Granted June 25, 2003 Richard Dionne Board of Appeal�`�C • 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 • CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSE7CfTS'('10t... U NMA BOARD OF APPEAL CL�.RK5'9.FFIGE� 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 • FAX (978) 740.9846 �,, r, STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF KEVIN HERBERT REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4 RICE STREET R-2- A hearing on this petition was held December 17, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Stephen Harris, Richard Dionne, Joseph Barbeau and Bonnie Belier. 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 setback and side setback to allow an existing shed to remain for the property located at 4 Rice 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. The Petitioner is requesting a Variance from side and rear setback to construct a shed addition to the back of the garage to contain trash receptacle and keep them from being invaded by raccoons and such. The setback would be 0 rear setback instead of the 5ft. required and side setback would be 0 instead of the required 5 ft. 2. The owner of 40 Bridge Street, Susan Sullivan stated that she thought the addition was built on part of her property. The petition was continued to allow Ms. Sullivan time to show the Board proof that this was in fact true.. 3. A survey was conducted by Meridian Associates, Inc, and did in fact scow that the shed was 3 inches on her property at 40 Bridge Street. • 4. To be in compliance with the variance, the petitioner agreed to move the shed to his property line. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF KEVIN HERBERT REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4 RICE STREET R-2 page two 5. Ms. Sullivan was still in opposition to the petition. 6. The petition was allowed with the following conditions. 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 in favor and 1 in opposition 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 construction shall be done as per plans submitted and approved by the Building Commissioner. 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 the existing structure. 6. The petitioner shall relocate the shed within 60 days upon receiving the building permit. Variance Granted December 17, 2003 Step en Harris nC • Board of Appeal, Memb J DECISION OF THE PETITION OF KEVIN HERBERT IREQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4 RICE STREET R-2 page three 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 SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL p� 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOo Y (9F SALEM.,MA • 1 f SALEM, MA 01970LERK'S OFF E,' TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR ZOO) DEC 30 P 2 19 ' DECISION OF THE PETITION OF PHILLIP PELLETIER REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 22 SAVOY ROAD R-1 A hearing on this petition was held December 17, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Stephen Harris, Richard Dionne, Joseph Barbeau and Bonnie Belier. 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 setback, lot coverage to construct an addition on rear of house and separate 22 x 25 garage for the property located at 22 Savoy Road 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. Attorney George Atkins of 59 Federal Street in Salem represented the Petitioner, Phillip Pelletier. 2. Plans were submitted showing the proposed project. 3. Speaking in favor for the petition was Councillor O'Keefe, Councillor Lovely, Ed Ferris of 21 Naples Road and abutter from 11 Naples Road. 4. There was no opposition to the proposed petition. i DECISION OF THE PETITION OF PHIILLIP PELLETIER REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 22 SAVOY 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. 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 in favor and 0 in opposition 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 construction shall be done as per plans submitted and approved by the Building Commissioner. 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 the existing structure. Variance Granted December 17, 2003 Richard Dionne �sCr�, 'Board of Appeal, Membe • 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 • CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY'OF SALEM. MA 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE • �,( SALEM, 07970 TEL. (978)) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. i003 MAY - IP 100 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF HOBART & ANDREA KALKSTEIN REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 25 SAVOY ROAD R-1 A hearing on this petition was held April 30, 2003 meeting with the following Board Members were present: Nina Cohen Chairman, Stephen Harris, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair 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. At the request of the petitioner's Hobart & Andrea Kalkstein, the Salem Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant leave to withdraw this petition without prejudice requesting a Variance for the property located at 25 Savoy Road located in a R-1 zone. GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE • May 1, 2003 I \ ✓✓N"inna 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 SALF-M, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL =' 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOORCITY OF SALEM. MA SALEM, MA 01970 CLERK'S OFFICE. TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR 1003 MAR 24 P DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ILENE SIMONS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 79 SCHOOL STREET B-1 A hearing on this petition was held March 19, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Nicholas Helides, Stephen Harris, Bonnie Belier 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 from setback and rear setback to construct 2 additions for the property located at 79 School Street located in a B1 zone. 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. David Jaquith, Architect for the petitioner appeared and presented the plans of the addition. 2. Plans were shown showing the 2 additions. The proposed additions will create setbacks of 11 feet and 14 feet. 3. A petition signed by 20 neighbors was presented to the Board. 4. Jim Hacker, Councillor Bencal and Elizabeth LeClerc spoke in favor of the petition. 5. There was no opposition to this petition. • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ILENE SIMONS REQUESTING VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 79 SCHOOL STREET B-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.' 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 construction shall be done as per plans submitted and approved by the Building Commissioner. 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 MARCH 19, 2003 11C /d Nicholas Helides CSC Board of Appeal JJJ • 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 • • �goND CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS CITY OF SALEM, M4 BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • ����, . ��o. SALEM, MA 01970 �sio`Y TEL. (978) 745-9595 �B�AnNa�� FAX (978) 740-9846100) JUL -2 P I: I STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR DECISION ON THE PETITION OF AAA MODULAR HOMES LLC REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16 SCOTIA STREET R-1 A hearing on this petition was held on June 25, 2003, with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belair and Joseph Barbeau. 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 Variance from minimum lot size and frontage to subdivide 2 lots into 4 lots for the property located at 16 Scotia Street 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 AAA Modular Homes LLC purchased two lots at 16-18 Scotia Street in May of 2002. There lots were contaminated by the presence of asbestos in underground pits apparently left by previous owners. According to the petitioner's representative Lawrence A. Simeone Jr.Esq, the cost of cleaning and removing contaminated soil will be over$150,000.00 2. In order to finance the cleanup, petitioner seeks variances to subdivide and create four single family homes on the site each having square footage of less than the required 15, 00 square feet and each having less than the required 100 ft of frontage. 3. Neighbors speaking in opposition to the proposed variance were Karen Lavorti of 23 Summit St., Deb Conway of 4 Scotia St., Robin McGlone of 30 Summit St., • Andrea Peterson of 10 Scotia St, Kathleen Deleos of 9 South St, Rob Rennicks and Dorothea Comier of 25 Summit St. also stated their opposition to the • DECISION ON THE PETITION OF AAA MODULAR HOMES LLC REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16 SCOTIA STREET R-1 page two proposed variance. They stated that their property was damaged by water runoff caused by petitioner's improper excavation and site work. Mrs. Lavoratic confirmed that petitioner has created a dangerously unstable condition by piling earth against a 6 ft fence at the perimeter of her property resulting in an abrupt change of grade between the two properties that had not been there before 4. The neighbors further stated that they have suffered anxiety as a result of the petitioner's failure to comply with state requirements for hazardous waste cleanup, in that they may be exposed to airborne asbestos particles. 5. Ward 4 City Councillor Leonard O'Leary stated that petitioners had met with the neighbors and had been asked to provide a plan to ensure safety vehicles could access the proposed lots. Petitioner failed to present a plan for creating a roadway to ensure access. Indeed, due to a schedule conflict neither the petitioner nor his representative appeared at the hearing. 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 JUNE 25, 2003 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 • • ¢o CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS CITY OF SALEM. MA BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE? _ 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MA O 1970 • q�' TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAx (978) 740-9846 100) NOV 26 A II I STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 2 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF NAREG & NANCY GRIGORIAN REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9 SUTTON AVENUE R-1 A hearing on this petition was held November 19, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Stephen Harris, Nicholas Helides and Bonnie Belier. 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 allow construction of an addition for the property located at 9 Sutton 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. Petitioners are homeowners seeking relief from rear and side setback requirements to build a residential addition to their turn of the century home. This Board rejected their initial building plans in February 2003 due to objections from abutting homeowners. Following that decision petitioners revised their plan and in September 2003 obtained permission to re-apply to this Board within the two- year time frame on the grounds that specific and material changes were made to the proposed project. 2. The proposed two-story addition to the Grigorian's home is designed in keeping with the architectural style and period of the house. The roofline will be extended to the rear of the house and on the first floor; a wraparound porch will extend to within 6 feet of the rear property line. To the left of the front door, the proposed new porch will extend to within 4 feet of the property line. • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF NAREG & NANCY GRIGORIAN REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9 SUTTON AVENUE R-1 page two 3. There was considerable discussion about the impact of the increased density upon the surrounding properties. Many neighbors wrote in support of the proposed addition, but abutter, Mike Townsend of 111 Columbus Avenue was concerned that the proposed addition might close access to safety vehicles. He also thought that the proximity to his garage raised issues regarding fire safety in the Gregorian's home. 4. Abutters Arouth, Nuncio, Flickenstein and Ford had no objection to the petition, Which was also supported by Annette Potay of 10 Sutton Avenue, Larry Spang of 125 Columbus Avenue, Joseph & Annette Caruso of 16 Sutton Ave, Anne O'Shea of 15 Winter Island Road and Lawrence Campbell of 14 Sutton Avenue. 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 requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 3. All construction shall be done as per plans submitted and approved by the Building Commissioner. 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 the existing structure. 7. Project shall be completed within 12 months. • . DECISION OF THE PETITION OF NAREG & NANCY GRIGORIAN REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9 SUTTON AVENUE R-1 page three Variance Granted November 19, 2003 Nina Cohen Board of Appeals 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 • wird CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS CITY OF SALEM. MA BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE \ 9 _ 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR Fa SALEM, MA 01970 NIN6dTEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9848 IUO] FEB 25 P 135 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR DECISION ON THE PETITION OF NAREG GRIGORIAN REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9 SUTTON AVENUER-2 A hearing on this petition was held on February 19, 2003, 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 Variance from side and rear setbacks to construct a 12 x 24 addition for the property located at 9 Sutton Avenue 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. Petitioner, owner of the property requests a variance from right side and rear setback to construct a two story 12 x 24 addition. The rear setback would be 7" and the side setback would be 4". 2. Mr. Grigorian presented his petition with his architect present to assist with Details. The addition would be built to complement and match the existing structure. 3. Mike Townsend, 111 Columbus Avenue is an abutter to the rear of 9 Sutton Avenue objected to the addition for the following reasons; addition to close to his property line and the addition would take his view of the skyline away. 4. Dianne Burns an abutter to the petition feels the addition would impede views from her property 5. Letters were sent in favor of the petition were from an abutter at 11 Sutton Ave., 117 Columbus Ave, and the abutter at 14 Sutton Ave. • DECISION ON THE NAREG GRIGORIAN REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED A 9 SUTTON AVENUE 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 FEBRUARY 19, 2003 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 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 ('I1 Y OF SALEM. MA n° 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLr6cCLERK'S OFFICE' . a. SALEM, MA O 1970 • �% TEL. (978) 745-9595 �i'pmrs FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 1003 OCT 21 A II' 40 MAYOR DECISION ON THE PETITION OF DANIEL HIBBARD d/b/a/ AAA CLIMBERS INS. REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 120 SWAMPSCOTT ROAD I A hearing on this petition was held on October 15, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, 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 change existing non-conforming to a Wholesale Contractors Supply Business for the property located at 120 Swampscott Road located in a I 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 DANIEL HIBBARD d1b/a/AAA CLIMBERS INS. REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 120 SWAMPSCOTT ROAD II pagetwo 1. Petitioner Daniel P. Hibbard of 23 Trifone Rd. Revere, owner of AAA Climbers Inc. of Saugus, Ma.entered a purchase and sale agreement for the purchase of an 8-acre property at 120 Swampscott Road that is presently mixed residential and commercial use. Since 1966, landowners Carmine and Angelo Mongiello have owned and operated a contracting business on the site, and have permitted renters to inhabit several homes on the property. 2. Petitioner represented by Lawrence A. Simone Jr., Esq. of Revere, seeks zoning relief to allow conversion of the use from a contracting business to a "retail wholesale contractor supply establishment'. Petitioner's business use includes the manufacture of wood chips from tree stumps, along with wholesale and retail sales of mulch and woodchips, tree removal, preparation and sale of lumber and firewood, ant the rental and storage of excavation equipment and vehicles. Petitioner also wishes to continue the residential use by permitting tenants to rent and use the existing houses on the site. 3. A private way from the subject property gives access to Swampscott Road. This access route is presently used by the Mongiellos and their tenants to reach the residential homes and the building where commercial trucks and equipment are • stored. Petitioner will seek to provide access to the proposed business via a street known as Robinson Road, which they content is a city street Abutting owners Fred 8 Shirley Hutchinson of Mountain Realty Trust contest this assertion and their claim, that Robinson Road cannot be used as a public way, is currently being tested in court in litigation arising over an unrelated issue. For these purposes, it is sufficient to note that the abutters believe there is no appropriate access to the subject property via Robinson Road. 4 .Appearing on behalf of his uncles the Mongiellos, Patrick Delulis, Esq. of Salem stated that the proposed use is consistent with the historic use of the property as a mixed commercial and residential property, and is consistent with the intention of the City of Salem to retain the site's commercial and industrial use. 5. Ward 3 City Councillor Joan Lovely made a site visit and recorded her reaction via a letter sent to the Board of Appeal. Ms. Lovely suggested that the existing trees along the Swampscott Road end of the property be left uncut to retain a noise buffer to prevent nuisance affecting the homeowners across Swampscott Rd. in the condominium complex, and Mr. Hibbard agree to make that a condition of the special permit. Ms. Lovely also noted that the Planning Board's assistance would be needed to assist petitioner in developing access to his business from Swampscott Road. Petitioner asserted that his project would obtain Planning Board review and approval. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF DANIEL HIBBARB d/b/a/AAA CLIMBERS INC • REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 120 SWAMPSCOTT ROAD I. page three 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 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 requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and safety shall be Strictly adhered to. 3. All construction shall be done per plans and dimensions submitted. 4. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction 5. Petitioner shall obtain a Certificate of Inspection. 6. Petitioner shall obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to the Planning Board. 7. Regulate hours of operations between dawn and dusk. 8. Petitioner shall avoid clearing buffer trees between business and residential. 9. Petitioner shall comply with noise ordinance. 10. Petitioner should work with the Planning Board regarding the entrance of Swampscott Road to minimize the impact to tenants Special Permit Granted October 16 2003 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 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 CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSF�I I Y OF SALEM; MA BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE gj 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • t�, SALEM, MA 01970 qqQ TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. ,1003 JUN -U P 2-- MAYOR -MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ANTHONY GERMANO REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 25 VARNEY STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held May 21, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair, 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 rear yard setback and front yard setbacks to construct an addition for the property located at 25 Varney 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. The petitioner appeared and represented himself at the hearing. 2. Plans were submitted showing the proposed addition 3. The new construction is needed to accommodate his family. 4. There was no opposition to this petition. • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ANTHONY GERMANO REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 25 VARNEY STREET R-2 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 construction shall be done as per the 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 May 21, 2003 Bonnie Belair S'C,Y�., 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 • CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CITY 8f SALEM. MA SALEM, MA 01970 CLERK'S OFFICE • TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. MAYOR 1003 DEC 23 P' �: p DECISION OF THE PETITION OF DYLAN CADWALDER REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6 WARD STREET R-3 A hearing on this petition was held December 17, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Stephen Harris, Richard Dionne, Joseph Barbeau and Bonnie Belier. 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 parking to convert an existing non- conforming store to conforming residential for the property located at 6 Ward Street located in a R-3 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, Dylan Cadwalder represented himself at the hearing. 2. Petitioner seeks a variance from the Zoning Ordinance Section 7-3 (Off-street Parking) to convert an existing non-conforming store to conforming residential 3 unit building. 3. There was no opposition to the proposed petition. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF DYLAN CADWALDER REQUESTING A VARIANCE • FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6 WARD STREET R-3 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 4 in favor and 1 in opposition 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 construction shall be done as per plans submitted and approved by the Building Commissioner. 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 the existing structure. 6. Petitioner shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy. Variance Granted December 17, 2003 L Bonnie Belair Board of Appeal, Member • 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 • • 'CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETT8TY OF SAL€.MAMA BOARD OF APPEAL S) 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFIFI.CE' a SALEM, MA 01970 • TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. -,r10OlpE 23' P .1- 13 MAYOR DECISION ON THE PETITION OF FERNANDO GOMES REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 70 WEBB STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held on December 17, 2003, with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Stephen Harris, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Beliar and Joseph Barbeau. 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 Variance from side, front and rear setback to construct a new 2 family structure for the property located at 70 Webb 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. Petitioner owner the property at 70 Webb Street in an R-2 district, consisting of a one-story structure. In past years this property was used as Pete's Barber Shop. Upon information and belief, the nonconforming use was discontinued more than 2 years ago and had expired. 2. The Petitioner seeks to build a 2-unit townhouse for residential use on the existing nonconforming lot of 3,485 sf. Variances sought use from, front, side and rear setback and lot area requirements, the proposed dwelling will be 30 'x 35' and will not exceed the lot coverage requirement of the Zoning Ordinance. Frontage on Webb Street is 46.4' will two curb cuts currently in place. 3. Substantial opposition to the proposed plan was expressed. Neighbors stated that because of the small size of the lot, the added density would detract from • their property value and create parking difficulty on a street where parking is DECISION ON THE PETITION OF FERNANDO GOMES REQUESTING A VARIANCE • FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 70 W EBB STREET R-2 page two already at a premium. In addition, the proposed off-street parking was described as dangerously difficult, since the lot size does not allow vehicles to turn around to exit onto Webb Street. 4. Attending to speak in opposition were Lenn Doherty, 35 Briggs St., Fred French, 28 Briggs St., Robert Seamans, 73 Webb St. Mike Bucco of 72-74 Webb St. Also in opposition was Ward 2 City Councillor Regina Flynn, who said she received phone calls in opposition to the project. Counciller-elect Mike Sosnowkski, who also got phone calls from neighbors in opposition to the proposal, Ward 7 City Councillor Joseph O'Keefe who opposed adding to the density of this already dense city neighborhood, and via letter, from David Lieh, an architect and neighbor. 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 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 DECEMBER 17, 2003 Nina/Cohen, Chairman J 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 • • 6�¢oND CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL • yi 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR S CITY OF SALEM MA SALEM, MA 01970 CLERK' OFFICE TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR 1001 FEB 20 P 3: 13 DECISION OF THE PETITION OFJAMES SHEA REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 78A WEBB STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held February 19, 2003 meeting with the following Board Members were present: Nina Cohen Chairman, Stephen Harris, Nicholas Helides, Richard Dionne and Joan Boudreau.. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and others and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. At the request of the petitioner's Attorney Stephen Lovely, the Salem Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant leave to withdraw this petition without prejudice requesting a Variance from minimum lot area, minimum lot area per dwelling, lot coverage and number of stories to allow a 2 unit building for the property located at 78A Webb Street located in a R-2 zone. • GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE. FEBRUARY 19 2003 Q , 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 c 11• CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHU%rWT� SALEM. MA . � BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE • 3 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 mrvsW FAX (978) 740-9846 .1001 MAR '4 P I I Z STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ROOBERT LEMELIN REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 15 WILLSON STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held February 19, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Richard Dionne, Nicholas Helides, Stephen Harris 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 Variances from side setback, rear setback and lot coverage, to construct an 25 'x 55' addition for the property located at 15 Willson 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 appeared and represented himself at the hearing. 2. Plans were shown showing the proposed addition. 3. Petitioner seeks a relief from the side yard setback, rear yard setback and lot coverage to construct his addition for his family. 4. There was no opposition to this petition. • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ROBERT LEMELIN REQUESTING VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 15 WILLSON 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. All construction shall be done as per plans submitted and approved by the Building Commissioner. 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 FEBRUARY 19, 2003 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 • CITY OF SALE OFA SSACHUS";TTT�F SALEM. MA BOARD120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR OFFICE • `'a �'� . ��` SALEM, MA 01970 �e1eT TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 1001 QP MAR 2l A 4 2 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF THE CITY OF SALEM REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 50 WINTER ISLAND ROAD A hearing on this petition was held March 19, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman„ Stephen Harris, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belair 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 New in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting a Variance to permit Seasonal Overnight Use of Winter Island Campground for the property located at 50 Winter Island Road R-1. 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, the City of Salem, request a variance from the Ordinance requirements to permit overnight use by recreational vehicles of Winter Island Marine Recreation Area during the period from April 1 through November 1. As grounds for the request, the City of Salem asserts that Winter Island has been used by recreational vehicles seasonally for more than 15 years without negative impact upon the environment of the neighborhood, and that the fees collected for such use support the maintenance and upkeep of the park. 2. Ward I Councillor Claudia Chuber and Ward 5 Councillor Mike Bencal said they did not oppose the use of recreational vehicles at Winter Island Park during the season. • CITY OF SALEM, MA CLERK'S OFFICE „1003,M0 2l, A 0)4 9 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF CITY OF SALEM REQUESTING VARIANCES FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 50 WINTER ISLAND ROAD 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 approval from all City Boards or Commission having jurisdictions including, but not limited to, the Planning Board. Variance Granted March 19, 2003 Nina Cohen ( C `— 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 • "'CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL CITY OF S,pt,, ��},A 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLEWS-@ CE, SALEM, MA 01970 • TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 n-r STANLEY MAYORJ. VICZ, JR. .1003OEC 23P 1j: 'j DECISION OF THE PETITION OF CITY OF SALEM REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 50 WINTER ISLAND ROAD R-1 A hearing on this petition was held December 17, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Stephen Harris, Richard Dionne, Joseph Barbeau and Bonnie Belier. 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 Section 5-2 to allow use year round by the Caretaker for the property located at 50 Winter Island Road 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. The Petitioner, City of Salem requests for Variance to allow year round residential trailer to be used by Caretaker at Winter Island Park for security and Maintenance. 2. Salem Park and Recreation Director Doug Bollen represented the City of Salem. He explained the caretaker's responsibilities are to maintain the park facilities and provide security. 3. In support of this petition, the Board heard eloquent and persuasive statement by Former Winter Island Park Manager Gary Moore. The Board also heard testimony from Salem Police Captain Robert Callahan, Sergeant and Harbormaster Peter Gifford, Antiterrorist Officer Andrea and Ward 7 City Coundillor Joseph O'Keefe in support of this petition. 0 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF CITY OF SALEM REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR • THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 50_WINTER ISLAND 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. 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 in favor 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. • Variance Granted December 17, 2003 Cam-('�_1'�U`� Nina Cohen, Chairmhc ct J Board of Appeal • 1 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 CITY OF SALEM, MA ye V� � BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • \ . �� SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 1003 JUL 22 A 10: 45 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF WINTER STREET LLC REQUESTING A VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 WINTER STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held July 16„ 2003, with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Stephen Harris, Richard Dionne, 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 a Variance from use to allow 6 residential units, to allow two principal building on one lot, relief from minimum lot are per dwelling and number of stories for proposed addition and s Special Permit to extend an already non-conforming structure for the property located at 7 Winter Street located in a R-2 zone. 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 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 WINTER STREET LLC REQUESTING A VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 WINTER STREET R-2 page two The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented, and after reviewing the plans makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner Winter Street LLC is a Massachusetts corporation that owns and operates a local business known as The Inn at Seven Winter Street. Petitioner and the principal Dee Cote were represented at the hearing by Attorney George Atkins and by Dan Pierce, architect and designer for the project. 2. Petitioner presented a plan to convert the existing bed and breakfast to a six-unit condominium. The plan utilizes the existing Second Empire Victorian residence and grounds, and add a two story carriage house and two three-story additions, each of which would be designed and constructed is a is a historically- appropriate style. Two parking places for each of the six units would be provided in an off-street lot at the rear of the property. Each two-bedroom unit would be greater than 1500 of its size. 3. In support of the conversion, Mr. Atkins argued that condominium owners have a greater interest in maintaining properties than do renters, and that the condominium form of ownership can ensure capital repairs are performed on a. regular basis since the owners are on site. Basic maintenance, trash and snow removal are functions normally performed for the condominium owners as a part of the service paid for by'the condo fees. He further argued that the residential • use is less than a commercial use. Finally he noted that because the project involves six units, it would undergo site plan review by the Planning Board prior to construction, thus ensuring a close review'of the layout of the traffic flow, services and other nuts and bolts of the development. 4. Architect Dan Pierce presented the project plan. He noted that five units would be created in the main building, including one unit entirely on the first floor and four two-story units in the in the house and additions. The plan calls for the retention of all existing Victorian design features within and without the house, which with the high ceilings and expansive room size, are a marketing asset to the development. Most of the existing trees will be saved to preserve the grounds. Early city plans show the property previously had a carriage house on the grounds and the proposed two-story building will fit in with the scale of the houses toward the rear of the property. 5. Speaking in support of the proposed plans were abutters John Wright, 5 Winter St., Hannah Dozzi, 20 Pleasant St. and Dick Dunham 131 Bridge St. and neighbors Joe Schoke of 16 Pleasant St., Jean Garakan 4 Parker Court, Paul Guido 15 Pleasant St. and Mary Manning of 14 Winter Street. Proponents argued that the plan would improve both the property and the street, which was currently undergoing a renaissance that it would create housing to meet the needs of smaller families and older empty-nesters, that it would ensure the property would be well maintained and that they felt comfortable that Mr. Cote would build it well. 6. Opposed to the petitioner's plan were Kathleen Ward Atchason, 26 Winter St., Thea Grace Morgan, 11 Winger St. Jeffery Barrows, 14 Gregory St Marblehead, • Stephen Cummings of 20 Winter St., Jean Charanago, 18 Winter St., Marc and Marlene Schaaedle of 135 Bridge Street and Robert Ciociola and Janice Martin, new owners of 11 Winter St. Opponents expressed opposition to the increased • PETITION OF WINTER STREET LLC REQUESTING A VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 WINTER STREET R-2 page two parking difficulties on Bridge Street and to the reduced size of the dwelling units, which the argued, guaranteed a more transient resident than the existing residential homes. 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. Exterior finishes of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing Structure. 6. Petition shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained. 7. Petitioner shall obtain proper street numbering for the City of Salem Assessor's Office and shall display said number so as to be visible from the street. 8. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board of Commission having • jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Planning Board. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF WINTER STREET LLC REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT AND VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 WINTER STREET R2 page three Special Permit & Variance Granted July 16, 2003 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 • �o�irk CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS CITY OF Q BOARD OF APPEAL "`'LCM• MA CLERK'S OFFICE 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR (!r 11 SALEM, MA 01970 c ' • ��sqq "� TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 ,.1001 JUL — I P STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 3' Ob MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF PAUL MOYNIHAN REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 18 WISTERIA STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held June 25, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair, 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 New in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, The petitioner is requesting a Variance from side yard setback and rear setback to construct a 3-season porch for the property located at 18 Wisteria 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. The petitioner appeared and represented himself at the hearing. 2. Plans were submitted showing the proposed sun porch. 3. There was no opposition to this petition. • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF PAUL MOYNIHAN REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 18 WISTERIA STREET R-2 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 construction shall be done as per the 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 June 25, 2003 Richard Dionne ( .5 C✓� Board of Appeal J • 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 SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS CITY OF SALEM, MA BOARD OF APPEAL CL•ERA ) OFFICE 3 _ 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MA 01970 • 'i ,,; , TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 -1003 JUN -3 Q STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. I U MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF CHRISTOPHER CANTON REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 11 WITCHCRAFT ROAD R-1 A hearing on this petition was held May 21, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair, 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 rear yard setback to construct an addition for the property located at 11 Witchcraft Road located in an R-1 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 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. The petitioner appeared and represented himself at the hearing. 2. Plans were submitted showing the proposed addition 3. The new construction will be a family room, bedroom and master bedroom. 4. There was no opposition to this petition. • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF CHRISTOPHER CANTONE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 11 WITCHCRAFT ROAD R-1 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 construction shall be done as per the 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 May 21, 2003 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 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�,ca CITY 'OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS CITY Or- SALEM. MA BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR • �� SALEM, MA O 1970 s\ - TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAx (978) 740.9846 STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. .2003 JUL -9 A 9t 19 MAYOR DECISION OF THE PETITION OF LISA ALVES REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 10 WOODBURY COURT R-2 A hearing on this petition was held June 25, 2003 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair, 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 New in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting Variance from right side setback to construct a 16 x 16 addition for the property located at 10 Woodbury Court 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. Petitioners Lisa and Brandon Alves appeared and represented themselves at the hearing. 2. Plans were presented showing the 16 x 16 addition. 3. The right side setback will be 6 feet instead of the required 10 feet. 4. There was no opposition to this petition. • • DECISION OF THE PETITION OF LISA ALVES REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 10 WOODBURY COURT R-2 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 construction shall be done as per the 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. Existing finishes of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing structure. Variance Granted June 25, 2003 �w��, Bonnie elair 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 1.1. 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 •