10 ORCHARD TERRACE - BUILDING INSPECTION CVQ-�cvcd(Ze ,
74520 400A P4
ouol A �..� � t yr �A�am� 1.■M6/�MY•lVV� • • r ti
BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE
it • •
120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR
f SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970
TELEPHONE: 978-745-9595
FAX: 978-740-9846 2006 AUG. -3, P 253
KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL
MAYOR
July 26, 2006
Decision
Petition of Edward Curtin requesting a variance from rear yard setback
for property located at 10 Orchard terrace,
Two-Family (R-2) Zoning District
City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
A public hearing on the above petition was opened on July 19, 2006 pursuant to Mass
General Law Ch.40A, Sec. 11, the following Zoning Board members being present: Nina
Cohen, Annie Harris, Richard Dionne, Robin Stein and Steve Pinto.
The petitioner Edward Curtin is requesting a variance pursuant to section 9-5 to allow the
construction of a one-story addition to the existing structure located at 10 Orchard
Terrace, Salem, in the Two-Family (R-2)zoning district.
The petitioner is requesting a variance from the rear setback requirement of the City of
Salem Zoning Ordinance which thirty(30)feet in the R-2 district, to allow the
construction of a nine (9)by fourteen (14)foot one-story addition that would have a rear
setback of twelve (12) feet.
The Board of Appeals, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the public
hearing, and after thorough review of the Plans and Petition submitted, makes the
following findings of fact:
1. The property at 10 Orchard Terrace is within the R-2 zoning district.
2. The petitioner proposes to construct a nine (9) by fourteen (14)foot one-story
addition attached to the existing one and one-half story building.
3. The existing setback requirement is thirty(30) feet. The existing structure is
setback from the rear property line by twenty-one (21) feet. The total setback with
the proposed addition will be twelve (12) feet.
4. There were no members of the public who wished to speak in favor or against 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 and detailed plans, the Zoning Board of
Appeals concludes as follows:
r
J
1. The petitioner may construct the addition in conformity with the proposed plot
plan dated June 20, 2006 and entitled"Plot Plan of Land in Salem, MA", and
drawn by Robert Sotiros within in the R-2 district.
2. The petitioner's request for a variance from rear setbacks does not constitute a
substantial detriment to the public good.
3. The proposed addition does not nullify or substantially derogate from the
intent or purpose of the zoning ordinance.
4. In permitting such change,the Board of Appeals requires certain appropriate
conditions and safeguards as noted below.
In consideration of the above, the Salem Board of Appeals voted,five (5) in favor
(Cohen,Dionne, Harris,Pinto, Stein) and none (0)opposed, to grant the request for a
variance, subject to the following terms,conditions, and safeguards:
1. The owner shall submit building plans to the Zoning Board of Appeals prior to
the issuance of a building permit.
2. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statutes,ordinances,codes and
regulations.
3. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted to and
approved by the Building Commissioner.
4. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety
shall be strictly adhered to.
5. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction.
6. Exterior finishes of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing
structure.
7. A Certificate of Occupancy is to be obtained.
8. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having
jurisdiction including, but not limited to,the Planning Board.
Avta `P ALct;� /b..
Richard Dionne
Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
J
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY
CLE
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 the 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.