Loading...
96 NORTH STREET - ZBA 96 NORTH STREET ARTHUR C. CHALIFOUR� jyu c i P curb of rAppeal '81 FEB -2 A9 :49 DECEMBER 17, r.rt:CE AMENDED DECISION ON THE PETITION OF ARTHUR C. CHALIFOUR REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR 96 NORTH STREET - A hearing on this Petition was held on December 17, 1980 with the following Board Members present: Douglas Hopper, Chairman; Messrs. Piemonte, LaBrecque, Feeherry and Hacker. Notices of the hearing were sent to abutters and others and a notice of the hearing was published in the Salem Evening News on December 3, and December 10, 1980 in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A. The Petitioner has requested a variance for the property at 96 North Street to obtain the Board's approval for two existing and unauthorized additions pre- viously added to the property as well as to authorize the proposed construction of a loading dock and a proposed extension of a nonconforming front-yard setback. The Building is in a B-1 district. The Board of Appeals, after consideration of the evidence presented at the public hearing and after viewing the property makes the following findings of fact: 1. The property in question currently has two unauthorized additions in the rear of the property. Neither of these additions is constructed in accordance with terms of the State Building Code. 2. The property in question currently has an existing entrance which is an unauthorized encroachment on sideline requirements. 3. The requested variances will clear up existing zoning violations as well as reslove a boundary dispute with an abutter. On the basis of the above findings of fact, and the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Board of Appeals concludes as follows: 1. The property in question is unique because of its peculiar configuration and the manner in which the existing building (a non conforming structure) is located on the site. The property is also unique because of the existing zoning violations at the site. 2. The conditions described above especially affect the structure and land in question but do not generally affect the zoning district in which the building is located. 3. The conditions described above which affect the land in question, but not the zoning district generally cause a special hardship to the petitioner; unless the requested variances are granted the existing zoning ,,iolations at the site cannot be remedied. 4. The desired variances may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good. 9 Ling of �U1em, &flja�saC4U5 1 � r il AMENDED DECISION - ARTHUR C. CHALIFOUR - 96 NORTH STREET - PAGE TWO Therefore, the Board of Zoning Appeals unanimously voted in favor of granting the requested relief. The Board grants the requested variances to the petitioner on the following terms and conditions: 1. The 8' x 12' and 5' x 12' additions in the rear of the property shall'. immediately be brought into compliance with the State Building Code. 2. No later than January 6,. 1981 the existing entrance and stairs on the side of the building shall be removed. 3. A new entrance will be added to the front of the building in accordance with the plans provided to the Board. 4. Release deeds shall be exchanged by the Petitioner and his abutter in order to resolve existing boundary dispute. 5. A variance is also granted from side yard restrictions for a loading dock to be built at the side in accordance with plans submitted by the Board. The Loading Dock shall conform to all requirements in the Salem Zoning Ordinance. 6. The petitioner will not use the second floor of this property to expand his operation without further review by this Board. 7. The stairway shown on the plans submitted to the Board, to the second floor of this property will not be constructed without further approval by this Board. Anthony M. Feeherry, Secretary— 4' AP,-.L TJ S- 7!C 17 OF THE !;',ASS. INE DATE OF FILING F_fr IT is ;. 1 , - u K,: ZJ OF TAE MIN-.1 nivJ f.:W .Hv i t, .�t_?, a tICAiE OY TITLE.' - BOARD OF APPEAL A COPY OF THIS DECISION AND PLANS HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK. Poarbi of cAppeal '81 JA -2 A 9 :20 DECEMBER 17 79$4 r� �RK'� OFFICE SALEii i-NC:..... DECISION ON THE PETITION OF ARTHUR C. CHALIFOUR REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR 96 NORTH STREET A hearing on this Petition was held on December 17, 1980 with the following Board Members present: Douglas Hopper, Chairman; Messrs. Piemonte, LaBrecque, Feeher-y and Hacker. Notices of the hearing were sent to abutters and others and a notice of the hearing was published in the Salem Evening News on December 3, and December 10, 1980 in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A. The Petitioner has requested a variance for the property at 96 North Street to obtain the Board's approval for two existing and unauthorized additions pre- viously added to the property as well as to authorize the proposed construction of a loading dock and a proposed extension of a nonconforming front-yard setback. The building is in a B-1 district. The Board of Appeals, after consideration of the evidence presented at the public hearing and after viewing the property makes the following findings of fact: 1. The property in question currently has two unauthorized additions in the rear of the property. Neither of these additions is constructed in accordance. with terms of the State Building Code. 2. The property in question currently has an existing entrance which is an unauthorized encroachment on sideline requirements. 3. The requested variances will clear up existing zoning violations as well as resolve a boundary dispute with an abutter. On the basis of the above findings of fact, and the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Board of Appeals concludes as follows: 1. The property in question is unique because of its peculiar configuration and the manner in which the existing building (a non conforming structure) is located on the site. The property is also unique because of the existing zoning violations at the site. 2. The conditions described above especially affect the structure and land in question but do not generally affect the zoning district in which the building is located. 3. The conditions described above which affect the land in question, but not the zoning district generally cause a special hardship to the petitioner; unless the requested variances are granted the existing zoning violations at the site cannot be remedied. of Pnar3 of AFFra1 DECEMBER 17, 1980 DECISION - PAGE WO - ARTHUR C. CHALIFOUR - 96 NORTH STREET 4. The desired variances may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good. Therefore, the Board of Zoning Appeals unanimously voted in favor of granting the requested relief. The Board grants the requested variances. to the petitioner on the following terms and conditions: 1. The 8' x12' and 5' x 12' additions in the rear of the property shall immediately be brought into compliance with the State Building Code. 2. No later than January 6, 1981 the existing entrance and stairs on the side of the building shall be removed. 3. A new entrance will be added to the front of the building in accordance with the plans provided to the Board. 4. Release deeds shall be exchanged by the Petitioner and his abutter in order to resolve existing boundary dispute. 5. A variance is also granted from side yard restrictions for a loading dock to be built at the side in accordance with plans submitted by the Board. The Loading Dock shall conform to all requirements in the Salem Zoning Ordinance. GRANTED - WITH CONDITIONS � vL Anthony M. F henry Secretary APPEr L cS. .-. '�_.-. .. t. ck I V O. P`_ _. ,''IT TO v.�l 17 OF THE h'AS$. _ c =_AL E'Ays DATE OF FILItJG �1. TM Li r > P. d PEM.11T ,P ..AL E .3 ,. aJ FILED, iLA�.1E OF THE OWNER . OF RECORD OR IS HORDED A. D IMED.0.1 Th' C.lucR.a CERTIFICATE CE TITLE. BOARD. OF APPFAI; -— - A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED. WITH .THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK 1 /� BOARD OF APPEALS' Kiddie c 17 Keop RECEIVED CITY OF SALEM,MASS. 98 NORTH STREET • SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 745-8685 JO &AMA— Ca /aa jo 9lv why 1 ' a— ua�uarc� a x_ U aCO1r,�et�eeoL r2 � 1a.00 6' G7YkA, WIUCJ-- au�n, / tea- X/50 acres. ce. hc�o tae - ve. a�o t� 96 CcC/p,�o ,Ccir�re ao� rc't a Im�Ute-, �wtaj�Li Gc��%/ /2CcG l ?J413911 yo C,iAoa i2a2�113JA an YT13 t • 4 r 1vans oa ba'+b0) 3fefa� o�0•Qva l S Z� roN 6 'svg W � oaaa `� WJ S \rrpjo 141 t MkD F �1- t N -- —r ,o W - w k � �i s3bvc+a-1 �g y 4 o6_£{s sLossasSu' ON t t IR 1 a F P I d N t , ip @I 00'/iii ] � �6 r v6_o i r Fes' 1 t' I. �I