Loading...
22 CHESTNUT STREET - ZBA� �� �'hes�����5���`- , . �' - - - �.� V 4 R V \ V F'v,\ ` V V �� ,� � T ^ I - LegaMticg r CITY OF SALEM + BOARD OF APPEALS I Will hold a public hearing for all per- sons interested in the petition submit- ted by NINA COHEN&CRAIG BAR- ROWS seeking a Variance from side yard to allow reconstruction of rear addition for the property located 22 CHESTNUT STREET R-1.Said hear- ing will be held on WEDNESDAY, APRIL 18, 2007, 6:30 P.M., 120 WASHINGTON STREET 3rd floor, Room 313. Nina Cohen,Chairman 4 ` SN—4/5,4/11/07 i May 24, 2007 Decision Petition of Nina Cohen and Craig Barrows Requesting a Variance for the Property at 22 Chestnut Street -_ City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals N A public hearing on the above petition was opened on April 18, 2007 pursuant to D T r• Massachusetts General Laws Ch. 40A, Sec. 11. The following members of the Salem Zoning Board of Appeals ("Zoning Board of Appeals") were present: Bonnie Belair, a r v Elizabeth Debski, Richard Dionne, Annie Hams and Robin Stein. N The petitioners, Nina Cohen and Craig Barrows ("petitioners"), sought a variance from side yard setback for the real property located at 22 Chestnut Street, Salem, located within a single-family residential (R-1) zoning district. The Zoning Board of Appeals, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the public hearing, and after thorough review of the petition submitted, submits the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioners' property is a legal non-conforming single-family dwelling within a single-family residence district. 2. Petitioners sought a variance from the minimum 10 foot side yard setback required under the zoning ordinance to the zero (0) side yard setback, which setback is necessitated by the party wall shared by the petitioners' property and their abutter's property. 3. The variance is being sought to enable the reconstruction of a one-story kitchen and woodshed at the rear of the existing structure without making any change to the building footprint. 4. The reconstruction will not increase the existing nonconformity of the lot and structure . 5. Anthony Strela of 24 Chestnut Street, inquired whether the Historic Commission approved the project. 6. Petitioners applied to and received the approval of the Historic Commission for the project. 7. Jean Pelletier (Ward Three Councillor) spoke in favor of the petition. On the basis of the above findings of fact, including all evidence presented at the public hearing, including,but not limited to the Petition,the Zoning Board of Appeals concludes as follows: 1. The petitioners' request for a variance does not constitute substantial detriment to the public good as residential uses are permitted in the R-1 district nor does the relief nullify or substantially derogate from the intent or purpose of the zoning ordinance. 2. A literal enforcement of the zoning ordinance would create a substantial hardship to the petitioners, which hardship is due to the shape of the building located on the property that contains a party wall. 3. In permitting such change,the Zoning Board of Appeals requires certain appropriate conditions and safeguards as noted below. In consideration of the above, five (5) members (Belair, Debski, Dionne, Harris and Stein) of the Salem Zoning Board of Appeals voted to grant the petitioners' request for a variance, and zero (0)members voted to deny the petitioners' request for a variance, subject to the following terms, conditions, and safeguards: 1. Petitioners shall comply with all City and State statutes, ordinances, codes and regulations. 2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted and approved by the Building Commissioner. 3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 4. Petitioners shall obtain building permit prior to beginning any construction. 5. Exterior finishes of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing structure. 6. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained. 7. Petitioners are to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to the Planning Board. 8. Unless this decision expressly provides otherwise, any zoning relief granted does not authorize the Petitioners to demolish or reconstruct any structures(s) on the property to an extent greater than 50% of the structure as measured by floor area or replacement cost. If a structure on the property is demolished by any means to an extent of more than fifty percent of its replacement cost or more than fifty percent of its floor area at the time of destruction, it shall not be reconstructed except in conformity with this Ordinance. Annie Harris Salem Zoning Board of Appeals A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH 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 of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 11,the Variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certificate of the City Clerk that 20 days have elapsed and no appeal has been filed,or that, if such appeal has been filed,that it has been dismissed or denied and 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.