38 NICHOLS STREET - GAUTHIER, ROBERT - ZBA 38 Nichols St. R-1
Robert Gauthier
i
� � I
3�. . '87 FP 13 P: V.
Ti#g of 'SttlPm, Httssttclluse##s
3 + s Puxrb of �ppral
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF. ROBERT E. GAUTHIER FOR A' VARIANCE
AT 38 NICHOLS STREET (R-1 )
A hearing on this petition was held on March 25, 1987 with the following Board
Members present: Edward Luzinski, Vice Chairman; Mr. Fleming and Associate
Members Dore and 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.
The petitioner, represented by Attorney Daniel Reich, is requesting a Variance
from rear yard setback to allow the continued use of an existing single family
dwelling at 38 Nichols St. The building currently sits only 25 feet from the
rear lot line, five (5) feet short of the requirements of Table I, Salem Zoning
Ordinance. The dwelling is located in an R-1 Zone.
The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding by the
Board that:
a. 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 in the same district;
in -
the Zoning Ord ante would in
. literal enforcement of the provisions of g
b
volve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner;
c. desirable relief may
ranted without substantial detriment to the
Y be g
public good and without nullifying g or substantially derogatingating from the
intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance.
i
consideration of the evidence resented and
The Board of Appeal, after careful const presented,
after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact:
1 . There was no opposition to the petition presented at the hearing;
2. If the petitioner were denied his requested Variance, he would
suffer substantial hardship..
On the basis of the above finding of fact, and on the evidence presented, the
Board of Appeal concludes as follows:
,. 1 . Special conditions exist which especially affect this property but
do not generally affect other lands, buildings and structures in the
salem district;
2. Literal enforcement of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial
f hardship to the petitioner;
i,
3. The relief requested 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.
p
i
i
DECISION ON THE' PETITION OF ROBERT E. GAUTHIER FOR A VARIANCE
FOR 38 NICHOLS ST. , SALEM
page two
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 4-0 to grant the
Variance requested, with no conditions.
VARIANCE GRANTED
I
ames M. Fleming, Esq.
Member, Board of Appeal
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK
1URTION 17 OF THE MASS
` APPEAL FROM THIS DCCISION, IF ANY, SHALL BE MADE FPIN 0 TO SECTION Y
GENERAL LF\YS, CHAPTER US. AND SHALL bE F;LED %-i?HIN 26 DAYS AFTER THE DATE Of FiLINc
OF THIS DECISION IN THE OFFICE OF THE. CITY CLERK.
p;,wcAY,T MESS. GEIlERA! LA`,IS, CHAPTER 803, SECTION 11. THE \'AP,IANCE OP. TH ! PE
TO
G'?a]ED
HE , SHALL NOT TAKE EFFECT UNTIL`A_L(`.`cOFI•ThE�i.-`'FPPELLBNG HA1&EETHFI F. C-Ei;
F; C' -'ISSED OR C` :ED IS
r;CATIC:N Of THE CITY CLEP.i THAT 20 DAYS H4\-
5P, -,HAT. IF SUCH A!! APPS'7' HAS BEEN F .E. •`'A' IT
INDi ,ED U:.l .c^ THE ;v«.•� E OF Tt:=
RE::UBCEp IN THE SC'JTH ESSEX RE;ISTR1' OF DEEDS
OF RECORD OR IS RECORDED AND NDTED ON THE OI':NIR-S CERTIFICATE OF TITLE.
BOARD OF APPEAL
m
}: 1
"r��»y"T2-- ,-.k 4 {., � � ; �`.�i 1,rt ti wk i v1.4 � 4' )ah 1 " ,n t� Y � : S.. -• r+ fi'`4 F*yli`c��v -
w y"r'Dx r�5. " h` .114 `'' ;`" 9-•f�T.0-�`y a'9ni�a,.t F nhJ�ti A�1-ay _,y. ray£ •v. h. Y� -t -: Et+ SFi r s -v.i Mia t
i 'X r+ SS- '[.iG'?�' .� � .�.a t �,. •E i het l lr� Y='3R3'7'�,.•K. � k'F�s-ts y;� .xw V.x� � Y v3+L%liyt35. .J x'v Rim tit 5
w" +.
� M1 t F.M ] � �%: h.-'� rya art'.s..t,•4-1,< L ,n,.yy�-� y � 'S�. 4`� : ~f�3' 1'^ ,�is+ / 2ai ,jR � �.:.s�V'j F 't t:
r t
F ^A
MOROIGAGE INSPECTION
BAY STATE SURVEYING SERVICE INC.
234 CABOT ST., BEVERLY, PAA.
CATION = -_`�t4LEMr_l�A ��`y ...... NOTES =
a This is a Mortgage inspection au and not
CALE = I =.30 FT. DATE ___��z�Fr7_______________ an instrument survey,therefore this plot plan is for
EFERENCE = G .Qf_ _yz�y____________________ mortgage inspection purposes only.
----
• ® This survey is based on survey marks of
--------- -- - -- -- ------•-- -------------- others.
To „Zi�r-gVZA? ��!}/�k _ m Bushes,shrubs, fences and tr®e linea do
hereby certify that I have examined the premises and that the not necessarily indicate property lines.
uilding(s) shown on this plan are located on the ground as
D
homn and that theyowriform� 4o the zoning setbacks of the ® The building(s) are not located in the special
flo
, �A�� od hazard zone, as defined by H.U.D.
L�L /
--- when constructed.
�}DpIY►orJ ��SNoT
C&IIAXY k)f'Yt4 WeAiZ
zoNIN(� a5 ,4
To 8E .3a
4, ' \
r r
1-4
i
I I
m
Z-0 --r -wd LU T
173 yq
'ih.`/I FEB I ( 1987
-A,
a
IVIORTRGAGE INSPECTION
BAY STATE SURVEYING SERVICE INC.
234 CABOT ST., BEVERLY, MA.
)CATIONjviA ;�> NOTES :
ALE - I" =3Q FT DATE-:'-.ZJ4/.?--7 . a This is a Mortgage inspection survvy and not
an instrument survey,therefore this plot plan is for
EFERENCE -------------------- mortgage inspection purposes only.
c> This survey is based on survey marks of
----------- - -- -- --------- -------------- others.
To -g&) -�/ &+ 'k o Bushes,.__, _q VW6�,j ...J!�� shrubs, fences and tree lines do
hereby certify that I have examined the promises and that the not necessarily Indicate property lines.
uilding(s) shown on this plan are located on the ground as
Powor0 The building(s) are not located in the special
hewn and that they oanform� to the zoning setbacks of the Mod hazard zone, as defined by H.U.D.
-------- when constructed.
c&mxy i1jrrt4 RFARL
-2-001 N3 .2
To 8E 30
g7
LorZ-07
11-73 s Z-/ �
6 T.
EB 1 1987