22 BARNES ROAD - DAVIS, RICHARD & DORIS - ZBA 22 BARNES ROAD (R-1 )
Richard & Doris Davis
a
� I
i
of "TWern, assac4usr##s r - --
0,
ear3 of Appeal
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF RICHARD & DORIS DAVIS FOR A C��•r "'.`F
SPECIAL PERMIT FOR 22 BARNES ROAD, SALEM
A hearing on this petition was held June 13, 1984 with the following Board
Members present: Ed Luzinski, Acting Chairman; Messrs. , Charnas, Gauthier and
Strout. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and others and notices of the
he were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with
Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A.
.Petitioners request a Special Permit to allow a porch to be built on the
premises. The porch would reduce the side setback to three (3) feet from it's
_ o already nonconforming setback..
N Z -
u_ n.wuy _
`- The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to this request
w 5 for�a`a Special Permit is Section V B.-10, which provides as follows:
s o a w o Notwithstanding anything tot he contrary appearing
- w in this Ordinance, the Board of Appeal may, in
oW , � � _ LL
W t: c = � -_ � m accordance with the procedure and condition set
Nd
" ` > r, forth, in Section VIII F nad IX D, grant Special Permits
< F = e iz- for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming
w structures, and for changes, . enlargement, extension or
r Y o r y expansion of nonconforming lots, land, structures,
and uses-, provided, however, that such change, extension,
u } H 4 W c enlargement or expansion stall not be substantially more
m > ;7 detrimental -than the existing nonconforming use to the
`- -
" W W neighborhood.
25 -
!
RCn more general terms, this Board is; when reviewing Special Permit requests
O
guided by the rule that a Special Permit request may be granted upon a finding
Sby the Board that the grant of the Special Permit will promote thepublichealth,
psafety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants_
; c
N Phe Board of Appeal, after hearing the evidence presented, at the hearing, makes
nthe following findings of fact:
5 `. . 1 . No opposition to petitioner's plan was raised by neighbors;
s
nW 2. The relief requested will have no appreciable impact on the
neighborhood or the abutters.
On the basis of the, above findings of fact and on the evidence presented at the
hearing, the Board concludes as follows:
1 . The relief requested does not create a substantial detriment to the public
good, nor does it substantially derogate from or nullify the intent or
purpose of the Ordinance.
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously to grant petitioner's
requested relief.
i
Scott E. Charnas, Secretary
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND CITY CLERK