119 BOSTON STREET - ZBA (2) /i 9 ,cas T,J cT
I
W
J
o.
of alrm tts5uthusr##s r fo.
0.
o.
, �
�s£
PnttrD of � venl t14E`#
'•o,. .,� eli9 A6€AK,WEN,MGM.
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF SOTIRIOS KORITSIANOS FOR A
VARIANCE FOR 119 BOSTON STREET (B-2)
A hearing on this petition was held March 16, 1988 with the following Board
Members present: James Hacker, Chairman; Messr. , Bencal, Luzinski, Strout and
Associate Member 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.
Petitioner, owner of the property, is requesting a Variance from front yard
setback requirements in other to allow the construction of a canopy in this
B-2 district.
The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding of 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;
b. literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would in-
volve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner;
c. desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the
Public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the
intent of the the district or the purpose of the Ordinance.
The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented and
after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact:
1 . Proposed canopy will enhance the property;
2. The proposed canopy will allow the petitioner to be competitive
and continue business at this location;
3. Abutters appeared in favor of this petition with conditions that
appropriate retaining walls be constructed.
4. Canopy cannot be located in any other area on this property.
On the basis of the above finding facts, and on the evidence presented, the
Board of Appeal concludes as follows:
1 . Special conditions exist which especially affect the subject property
but not the district generally;
2. Literal enforcement of the Ordinance would involve substantial
hardship 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.
DECISION 01, THE PETITION OF SOTIRIOS F;ORITSIANOS F-F. A
VARIANCE FOR 119 BOSTON STREET, SALEN
page two
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 5-0, to grant the
relief requested, subject to the following conditions:
1 . All construction be done as per plans;
2. All construction to conform to all city and state codes;
3. Retaining wall must be built along the Prospect Street side, not
lower than six (6) inches below grade;
4. Retaining wall to be built along the entire rear portion of the
property to prevent erosion;
5. Both retaining walls must be maintained;
6. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department be adhered to;
7. No outside speaker system to be in operation at any time.
GRANTED
Q�
� ames B. Hacker, Chairman
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK
6f'PE+L FF;".1 THIS DE:;ISIO?J. A':'i. SHALL BE "'-DE POPSCA;JT TO SECTIDII 17 OF THE
EN SHALL BE FP_E;. -iiJ 20 DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF FIL!I:.l
THE O.'.-GE OF THE Cli! CLEPN
F.i - ^S .,=.'. Sr,;°TF.4 S_-JiCil li THE VAR ;NCE C°
F.'., _. - -iL G" ' , E _ --.� b : r Ci FI JF TFS1__ . . °E .di
.
If:
r, r .,., n ... �.FPiS_ .-„- cE- .-F r-- 17 :I, ..-, .__ r>
OF RE„CR- ,;R IS NL JRDEO AI,J NC1L IOti THE 06NER'S CERTIFICATE OF TITLE.
BOARD OF APPEAL