Bonugli - Special Permit
Decision on Petition for a Special Permit
Requested by Kenneth J. Bonugli
A public meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals (the “Board”) was held on Tuesday
May 28, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. at Beverly City Hall, 191 Cabot Street, Beverly,
Massachusetts. The agenda included a petition by Kenneth J. Bonugli for a Special
Permit regarding the property located at 2 Woodbury Drive (the “Parcel”). The petition
is a request of a special permit to encroach 2’ plus or minus upon the required 15’ side
yard setback and to encroach 13’ upon the rear yard setback requirement of 25’, with an
18’ x 18’ open deck. The Parcel is located in an R-10 Zoning District.
The May 28, 2002 public meeting of the Board was called to order by the Chairman,
Scott D. Houseman. The following five members of the Board were present: full
members Scott D. Houseman, Scott Ferguson, Margaret O’Brien, Andrea Fish and Mark
Schmidt. Alternate members John Colucci, Jane Brusca and Joel Margolis were in
attendance but not voting.
The public hearing on this application started with the Zoning Clerk, Diane Rogers,
reading the application request to the public and the Board members reviewing the
application material.
Mr. Bonugli spoke on his own behalf. He stated that the proposed deck is in the most
desirable location in terms of access. He added that the deck would be approximately 30
inches off the ground. He submitted a petition in favor of the proposal from John T. and
Carolyn S. Sutton Dowd of 4 Woodbury Street, direct abutters.
When asked by Mr. Houseman, no member of the public present at the hearing wished to
comment on this petition.
The members then questioned the petitioner. They made the following observations and
obtained answers regarding criteria upon which findings must be made in order for the
Board to grant a Section 6 Special Permit. Mr. Schmidt clarified that Mr. Bonugli owned
the fence between his property and 4 Woodbury Street. Ms. Fish had no objections to the
proposal because the house is on a corner lot. Mr. Ferguson stated his concern that an
approval for a deck would be for an open deck only and that there should be no roof or
screened enclosure. When asked by Mr. Bonugli, Mr. Ferguson stated he would not be in
favor of removing the deck and rebuilding an addition. Mr. Houseman said that this
property is a nonconforming structure in an R-10 zone and that the standard is whether
the structure as altered would be more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing
nonconforming structure. He said this standard would be met by the proposed deck and
that he is in favor of the proposal. Ms. O’Brien stated that she is also in favor but that
any other construction upon the deck must be presented before the Board.
The Board incorporated its observations as its general findings of fact and made the
following specific findings about the proposed structure: (1) that the specific site is an
appropriate location for the proposed deck, and that the character of the adjoining uses
will not be adversely affected; (2) that no factual evidence is found that the property
values in the district will be adversely affected by such use; (3) that no undue traffic,
nuisance, or unreasonable hazard will result from the deck; (4) that adequate and
appropriate facilities such as electricity and city water and sewer currently exist for the
parcel; and (5) that there are no valid objections from abutting property owners based on
demonstrable fact.
Following the questioning and discussion, a motion was made by Mr. Ferguson to
approve the 18’ x 18’ open deck on the condition that the deck is to remain unscreened
and without a roof and that any future expansion or alteration to the deck should come to
the Board for review. The motion was seconded by Ms. O’Brien and it carried 5-0.
Appeals from the Board’s decision on this petition may be filed in accordance with the
provisions of M.G.L. Chapter 40A, Section 17, within twenty (20) days of filing of this
decision with the City Clerk. This decision shall not be valid unless recorded at the
Essex County Registry of Deeds in Salem, Massachusetts after the twenty-day appeal
period has passed without an appeal being filed.
Respectfully,
Scott D. Houseman
Zoning Board Chairman