29 APPLEBY ROAD - MALIK, FRANCIS & JACQUELINE - ZBA ~' 29 App,l'eby Rd.: .R-.l/RC -
Francis & Jac'queli.ne Malik (Pet)
Martial & Lorraine Boucher (owners) -—
-- - — —�
C
CS'
Y ':. � � ^
w
�, �: .
4p T _
,,, ,
�i" x n
'A m ro
b M
ro
MF
�h
l
I
a Cty of �ttlem 4 Hassadjusetts
`,, _.�J 10psQ�i •91 �nttra of ��enl
C OF c, 1FA!.
14
LERK ss
S c
or, icE
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF FRANCIS AND JACQUELINE MALIK, (PETITIONERS)
MARTIAL AND LORRAINE BOUCHER (OWNERS) FOR VARIANCE AT 29 APPLEBY RD.
(RC/R-1)
A hearing on this petition was held December 9, 1992 with the following
Board Members present: Richard Bencal, Chairman; Francis Grealish Jr. ,
Edward Luzinski, Stephen Touchette and Associate Member Arthur Labrecque.
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 are requesting variances to allow property at 29 Appleby Road
to be divided allowing 432 Sq. Ft. to be conveyed to 31 Appleby Road which
is owned by the petitioners. Property is located in an RC/R-1 district.
The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding by this
Board that:
1 . Special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect the
land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting
other lands, buildings and structures involved.
2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would
involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner.
3. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the
public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the
intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance.
The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented
at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings
of fact:
1. Frontage of the proposed new lots will not change.
2. New construction will not take place with this change.
3. The proposed property transfer will not adversely affect other property
in the area.
4. The property in question is of no practical use to the owners, it
contains a retaining wall, stockade fence, trees, shrubs and flowers which
have been built, planted and maintained by the petitioners.
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF FRANCIS AND JACQUELINE MALIK (PETITIONERS) ,
MARTIAL AND LORRAINE BOUCHER (OWNERS) FOR VARIANCE AT 29 APPLEBY RD. ,SALEM
page two
5. Due to the location and topography of the parcel in question to deny
the requested variance would present a hardship to both the owner and the
petitioner.
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. Special conditions exist which especially affect the subject property
but not the district in general.
2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would
involve substantial hardship to the petitioner.
3. Desirable relief can be granted without substantial detriment to the
public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the
intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance.
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 5-0, to grant the
variance requested, subject to the following conditions:
1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statutes, ordinances,
codes and regulations.
2. The property shall be divided as per the plans and dimensions n o
submitted. CIS
r N
m o N
VARIANCE GRANTED a T
7!,n
December 9, 1992 w o
CM
cA. Bencal, Chairman m N N
Board of Appeal
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND 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 after the date 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 certification 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 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.
Board of Appeal
w V� N
�ti Zti
h V,
tia Ioy �� N mLQ ko
r`
�a a e s N
(7 ��u QRcy Q
h0 O �a Z o N _ W V ,
ZZ)Z,
Ltim� Q ON vv� ¢O J w O O
LL Q j
LQ Q a o Q�aZWe Q
QomQOW �- W Q
oW ��4, JJ Q�y�I�Q �1y, J 2 ` �
i�Q Q VWVV h� l� I ` � � Q -X: ' Q o H O
2� p �WWtiy Q � �
r �' Z
IC7 QCiCiCi ZppC � W
~10 VZE ! �JJV ��� p• O W OQ
Q� Q Q �QQ tim titin j N N V
JJ � � Z �
W m
O �� W
ti �
Z
Z V
�2 2
1�,
JJ
422
Q�� I C4
\n � ^ Q
IJ
r
,2666
1l Qq '" u N
J V 6- N 3 � ' •� 1
t� fl W0
Q QON �gEW
Q Z TYB
Z W
W \\ v v0
Uri
Q� N0„woo
� ZQ �
Q � C &J ZL W
I N3� e� ha lu
o �O
` N I IJ LI I =�
�Z
5866 O 3
Q >3 y
� W � VRhj N Q
~ZQ Ep
f �O