Loading...
8 HANCOCK STREET - ZBA 8 Hancock St. (R-2) Roger & Lorraine LaPointe v � � ` ( jtU of ttlem, ttss g,tt Barb of vd ti ,�.,•� `� *35 APP, 30 P3 ;02 DECISION ON THE PETITION OF ROGER & LORRAI1MTWACe€RVS OFFICE FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR 8 HANCOCK ST. , SALEM SALEM A hearing on' this petition was held April 24, 1985 with the following Board Members present: James Hacker, Chairman; Messrs. , Charnas, Gauthier, Luzinski, and Strout. 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. Petitioners, owners of the property; are requesting a Special Permit to convert an existing three family dwelling into a four family dwelling in this R-2 district. The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to this request for a Special Permit is Section V B 10, which provides as follows: 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 VIII F and IX D, grant Special Permits for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming structures, and for changes, enlargement, extension or. expansion of nonconforming lots, land, structures, and uses, provided, however, that such change, extension, enlargement or expansion shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing use to the neighborhood. In more general terms, this Board is, when reviewing Special Permit requests, guided by the rule that a Special Permit request may be granted upon a finding by the Board that the grant of the Special Permit will promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants. The Board of Appeal, after considering the evidence presented at the hearing and after viewing plans of the property, makes the following findings of fact: 1 . There are other four and five family houses in the area; 2. There was no opposition; v 3. Neighbors appeared in support of the petition; 4. Would increase the tax base of the City of Salem. On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented at the hearing, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows: 1 . The proposed use will not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing use; 2. The relief requested is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance. DECISION ON THE PETITION OF ROGER & LORRAINE LAPOINTE FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR 8 HANCOCK ST. , SALEM page two Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously 5-0 to grant the Special Permit requested to convert from a three family dwelling to a four family dwelling under the following terms and conditions: 1 . Eight (8) parking spaces be maintained on site; 2. Must be owner occupied; 3. No structural changes except for windows as shown on- plans submitted to the Board; 4. A Certificate of Occupancy must be obtained. SPECIAL PERMIT GRANTED games B. Hacker, Chairman P. COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK r TO SECTION 17 OF THE MASS. PURSUANT g THE DATE OF FILING IS DECISION IF ANY. SHALL BE MADE WITHIN 20 DAYS ANTE BOS, AN SHALL BE FILED APPEAL FROM TH THE CITY CLERK. R SPECIAL PERE.'�IT !S. CHAPTER OF THE VARIAGCEFARIND THE CERT. GENERAL LAV H IN THE OFFICE SECTIOPi "I OF THIS 6EC15`� AL LIPi,,3. CF APTER SOR, " COPA' OF THEGECISICid. B_ FILED, ?::ACS. �E.,t,. CT UNTIL A r AND N2, Aopr AL HAS BEENis PtlRS.A'di iG i APS OR DFNIED T rl. SHALL NO TACT 20' DAYS HAVE E- P'c BEEN DIS"HISSED THE OWNER GRA1:TcD HER_.' CI FV' CLE RF; TP•A UNDER THE NAA1E OF FICATION GF THE 0,EDS ASID INDEXED TITLE. DR THAT. IF SUCH AI: APF EAL HAS gISTRY IGF Tr.AT I S CERTIFICATE OF NOTED ON THE OVlNER' RECORDED IN THE SOUTH ESSEX Rc� BOARD OF APPEAL n F03 R OR IS RECORDED AND 6P1 >c FTT mm 0 i w T (5 i No _V cnT w �7 M MORTGAGE INSPECTION BAY STATE SURVEYING SERVICE INC. 234 CABOT ST , BEVERLY, MA. LOCATION ...._....... To SCALE : 1° _ 20 FT. DATE : FFB:/ylyFF�_. I hereby certify that I have examined the premises and that the REFERENCE Qrar /3� ..�2�.�_ ..� �._._. building (s) shown on this plan are located on the ground as shown and that they conformed to the zoning setbacks of the Cfe4 __¢1`__..5A_lc_o�2------ when constructed. NOTE : This is a Mortgage Inspection survey and not The building(s) are not located in the special flood hazard an instrument survey, therefore this plot plan Is for zone, as defined by H.U.D. r/ mortgage inspection purposes only. 'A' u -------------- v--- ------- Low- LoT ' Low dor \ 10 9 -207 r a9a 6X15r�No- Hol 70P �1JA OF& S r3 PAR X)N 64 ROBERT 'c JAMES S SOTIROS ,p No.26084 O L---------- ---� ho SUR14 GO r THIS SURVEY' IS BASED ON LINES DOES, SHRUBS, FENCES & TREE.. NOT NECESSARILY INDICATE SURVEY MARKERS OF OTHERS., PROPERTY LINES. i J �� d b \ v 5� I t - f 5H1=LVE 5 10 , CIS I ® j L - I O10 L - i �I \ ;saw>z`.. J IL I - MA.ATE R aft t)F, 1 > I� I v l 6EDROOM j LIV I NG Gr MARTY CHAPUT qp Job TITI-2 - '- (/( -� ( THIRD F L-OOI? A\LCI=Sh F)&NfFl 51 o�AGI $ R rdovl,TloN POGER R. LAP0I NT'E B HANCOCK STT, r5ALE A) '°', G'�TE : ,oPR i L X2,1985 I NOT-�ff5 [� 4xd-�)KYLIGH-r f I N I6HED PL'AN VI r\.Ar Zx 4'5KYLIGHlr � X15TING ��EGTT<IGAL I ® CHI [IN r-Y AREA YA -rpt r I MI • I � I Ii- - - - -,Qj s II l — L — I e 5 GD PANELS Fii �1 I I i o ' i II II I I II I I � PANEL I < I F 41.0 I —� ( I �' �C PA�.>>=�� I MARTy CrAPuTr L il - - - - - - - - - - - -� L - - - - - - - - - - al I �- - - T-1 - - — — — — — — - - - -� —i _ - - - - - - - - - - - � I I J"oOTITLr:--: - - - I I T"HI P,D FLo6fZ RENOVATION RoG�-4R R. LAP-01 NTS L — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — -- — - — -- -- — c- 6 HkNCOCK 517 AL EM,M DQ.TE: APRI L22^8,5 NOT dKAWI NG: EXITING WALLS �X15i1NCT\r✓ALLS = NEu! WALL NFIW WI&ILL15 BS D —Fk�E1✓O�D HEAT PIMEN6IONZ 6A-ff-bOAR D HEAT- NEW r.LECTr,IC,d,L- I r T I I 1 I I I 1 t PRAFT:RYAN MAS 'C.HA PUT. i \ \y I TH I RP ffL-OM ~- �-,ENOVAT I O N ROGER R. LAPrOI NTI - �.1-V�t�1Cot:K DATi" : APRIL- a196,5 NAW NG: SKYLIGHTS, STAIRS �� � � �� I -- _, �,