37 CABOT STREET - SASALUXANON, TANIN - ZBA 37 Cabot Street R-2
Tanin Sasaluxanon
� 0
I
I
i
v�`����
i.[ _
l �l�
. ,
��
37 Cabot Street R-2
Tanin Sasaluxanon
9,
�varb of Aypea[
� �rt
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF TANIN AND SOMPIS SASALUSANIN 83 DCC 19 P 3 :LG
FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR 37 CABOT STREET
A hearing on this petition was held on November 30, 1983 with blloqingFSgasd
Members present: James Hacker, Chairman; Messrs. , Charnas, Hoppe:;-Luz inski- and
Associate Member Bencal. 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 Chanter 40A.
Petitioners request a Special Permit to allow him to construct and lease a third
apartment at the premises 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:
F
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing
in this Ordinance, the Board of Appeal may, in
J
- ' J accordance with the procedure and condition„ set
o - forth in Section VIII F and IX D, grant Special Permits
for alterations and reconstruction of nonconformin
' structures and for changes, enlargement, .extension or
' o expansion of nonconforming lots, .land, structures,
> ;. L and uses, provided, however, that such change, extension,
- - o enlargement or expansion shall not be substantially more
�W F-
? W detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to the
neighborhood.
In more general terms, this Board is, when reviewing Special Permit requests,.
guided by the ruly 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,
C Q safety, convenience and welfare of the City!s inhabitants.
The Board of Appeal, after hearing the evidence presented at the hearing, makes
_ x z the following findings of fact:
1 . No opposition to petitioner's plan was raised by neighbors;
J " Z " r 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 relief requested is in harmony with the purpose and intent of
_ O
" the Ordinance;
2. The relief requested will not be substantially detrimental to the
public good.
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal by a vote of four in favor and one voting'
present granted the petitioners the relief requested.
Scott E. Charnas, Acting Secretary
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND CITY CLERK
`1
i>
Rajw
y ,
sit
I
b