5 ORCHARD TERRACE - SODOSKI, TADIUS - ZBA 5 Orchard Terrace R=1
Tadius Sodoski
Ci �'
itv of alem, C assarhilsttts
: � 2 PDara of � rzd
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF TADIUS SADOSKI FOR A VARIEt�CE
FOR 5 ORCHARD TERRACE F(`t
Ci?•i 21 c c .�•k15$. I
A hearing on this petition was held December 17, 1986 with the following Board
Members present: Edward Luzinski, Vice Chairman; Messrs. , Bencal, Strout 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.
i
Petitioner, owner of the property, is requesting a Variance from density and settack
` requirements to allow construction of a breezeway and one car garage in this R-i ,
district.
The Variance which has, been requested may be granted upon=c--I nding of the Board
that:
a. special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect
the land, building or structure involved and which are notrrgenerally
affecting other lands, buildings and structures in the same district;
b. literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would imvclve
substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner; and
J , �
c. 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 Gf thl- evidencepresented at the
hee^i!rE, an-t after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact:
i . There was no opposition to the plan;
2. The proposed breezeway and garage would be beneficial to the
health of 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 circumstances exist which especially affect the subject propert
but do not generally affect other properties in the same district;
2. Literal enforcement of the Ordinance would involve substantial hardship
to the petitioner; and
3. The relief requested can be granted without substantial detriment to the
_ public good or without nullifying or substantially derogating from the
intent of the district or the purpose "of the Ordinance.
DECISION ON THE PETITIGN OF TADIUS SADOSKI FOR A
VARIANCE FOR 5 ORCHARD TERRACE, SALEM
page two
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 5-0, to grant the
Variance requested subject to the following conditions:
1 . Construction be done in accordance with plans submitted;
2. Exterior finish to conform with the existing structure;
3. All construction comply with Fire Prevention regulations and
the Massachusetts State Building Code;
4. A legal building permit must be obtained.
VARIANCE GRANTED
j'
y
Peter Strout, Member, Board of Appeal
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK
TOTHS
rT.r
IS
UTE C ._.
BOAR: C:
Q� v
c.
t- S
G -
G -
� W T
c _H
f
1✓1V5� Irl ��St Clwy(,� Solnh \.(wuG
o � Sa1�.-•►�
lit Iron
o bwvllw�5 I LaMb�,�x�wG
=�
AY ca i: sr-. >n
P
-TO o rc A,-^,, . sk IP
C� 92G � 1G2 -D T �iZCZ �,G�z
LoY-ra)i SadosL
1 "ZZd S�,P . 2�, 1Q86
�otyto�� �i�rvc�r �hsoG. ��
o
ti
FREDERICKV.
\,
FORGES �"'�
No. 27878 '
��Ps '7fctslE
�\
i
rEEF
AI
•i
EM
-
I � 4
lz-- - - ---
{
YY il(fe'.`!f r_a 4...
V
S. i
i
t .
}
i
nl
it
W � V
H.
z
Vr
w
1i
,l l
g
r
I
- j
-_ FTTI
Fl
FFH
-- _— --- - --TflIi -
— —
Ss
E
75
Db - -L� QSN <
j,.a
P
9
_ t
�4 L
= �X --- ------------
VV
A:
\ Z
v \\
La. �