Loading...
5 FREEMAN ROAD - ZBA 5 Freeman Road R_1 T— Charles & Paulette Puleo ro 2 6 vJ J � v of "Salem, ttssttcijusefts vara of Appeal JUNE 15, 1994 YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT AS OF JUNE 13, 1994 THE DECISION OF THE BOARD OF APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK TO GRANT THE PETITION OF CHARELS & PAULETTE PULED FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT AND VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A SCREENED IN PORCH AND A DECK WHICH WILL EXTEND AND EXPAND THE SIDE SETBACKS AT 5 FREEMAN ROAD. BOARD OF APPEAL BRENDA M. SUMRALL CLERK OF THE BOARD 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 MGL 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 MGL Chapter 40A. , Section 11, the Variance/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 owners Certificate of title. Board of Appeal r (f itv of 'z5ttlem, 'i9assadjusetts ✓y i Pottrb of 'Appeal °'?, pM+t 01,1 r 4.7 4''� DECISION ON THE PETITION OF CHARLES & PAULETTE PULEO FOR VARIANCES AND SPECIAL PERMIT AT 5 FREEMAN ROAD (R-1) A hearing on this petition was held May 18, 1994 with the following Board Members present: Stephen Touchette, Acting Chairman; Stephen O'Grady, Gary Barrett and Associate Member Nina Cohen. Member Hill was present but excused himself from the proceedings because of his personal relationship with the Petitions. 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, owners of the property, are requesting a Variance and Special Permit to expand and extend side setback to allow the rebuilding of a screened in porch and a deck. The property is located in the Residential Single Family District (R-1) . The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to this request for a Special Permit is section 5-3(j ) , which provides as follows: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing in this Ordinance, the Board of Appeal may, in accordance with the procedure and conditions set forth in Section 8-6 and 9-4, grant Special Permits for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming structures, and for changes, enlargement, extension or expansion of nonconforming lots, land, structures, and uses, provided, however, that such change, extension, enlargement or expansion shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to the neighborhood. In more general terms, this Board is, when reviewing Special Permit requests, guided by the rule 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, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants. The Variances which have 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 or structures in the same district. B. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner. DECISION ON THE PETITION OF CHARLES & PAULETTE PULEO FOR A SPECIAL PERM3T AND VARIANCE AT 5 FREEMAN ROAD, SALEM Gy page two L C. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to hire public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the y y intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance. s y s The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. There was no opposition to the petitioners proposal. 2. Neighbors of the petitioners and abutters to the subject property appeared in support of the petition. 3. The porch and deck to be constructed by the petitioners will be identical to one which previously existed on the site and which was removed by the petitioners upon learning that said porch and deck encroached upon side yard setback. 4. The only physical exterior change to the structure to be constructed will be that a portion of the porch and deck will now be screened. 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 Ordinance would involve substantial hardship on the petitioner. 3 . The relief requested 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. 4. The Special Permit granted can be granted in harmony with the neighborhood and will promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the city's inhabitants. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 4-0, to grant the relief requested, subject to the following conditions: 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statutes, codes ordinances and regulations. 2. All construction shall be done per the plans and dimensions submitted. 3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Dept. relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 7 DECISION ON THE PETITION OF CHARLES & PAULETTE PULED FOR A VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT AT 5 FREEMAN ROAD, SALEM page three G � y /1 4. Petitioners shall obtain a building permit prior to constructi6.ii., 5. A Certificate of Occupancy is to be obtained. L :,; rm b. Exterior finishes of the proposed construction shall be in harmony": Tth y the existing structure. �yN y LP Variance and Special Permit Granted May 18, 1994 Gary M. Barrett, Member 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 MGL 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 MGL 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 ;a of $Ulem, 'Massttrllusetts c ✓y�� °04 OZtTa of Aupeal u DECISION ON THE PETITION OF CHARLES & PAULETTE PULED FOR VARIANCES AND SPECIAL PERMIT AT 5 FREEMAN ROAD (R-1) A hearing on this petition was held May 18, 1994 with the following Board Members present: Stephen Touchette, Acting Chairman; Stephen O'Grady, Gary Barrett and Associate Member Nina Cohen. Member Hill was present but excused himself from the proceedings because of his personal relationship with the Petitions. 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, owners of the property, are requesting a Variance and Special Permit to expand and extend side setback to allow the rebuilding of a screened in porch and a deck. The property is located in the Residential Single Family District (R-1) . The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to this request for a Special Permit is section 5-3(j ) , which provides as follows: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing in this Ordinance, the Board of Appeal may, in accordance with the procedure and conditions set forth in Section 8-6 and 9-4, grant Special Permits for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming structures, and for changes, enlargement, extension or expansion of nonconforming lots, land, structures, and uses, provided, however, that such change, extension, enlargement or expansion shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to the neighborhood. In more general terms, this Board is, when reviewing Special Permit requests, guided by the rule 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, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants. The Variances which have 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 or structures in the same district. B. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner. DECISION ON THE PETITION OF CHARLES & PAULETTE PULEO FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT AND VARIANCE AT 5 FREEMAN ROAD, SALEM Gy page two f� C. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the-_\;, �y public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the w �y intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance. 9s s The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. There was no opposition to the petitioners proposal. 2. Neighbors of the petitioners and abutters to the subject property appeared in support of the petition. 3. The porch and deck to be constructed by the petitioners will be identical to one which previously existed on the site and which was removed by the petitioners upon learning that said porch and deck encroached upon side yard setback. 4 . The only physical exterior change to the structure to be constructed will be that a portion of the porch and deck will now be screened. 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 Ordinance would involve substantial hardship on the petitioner. 3. The relief requested 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. 4. The Special Permit granted can be granted in harmony with the neighborhood and will promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the city's inhabitants. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 4-0, to grant the relief requested, subject to the following conditions: 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statutes, codes ordinances and regulations. 2. All construction shall be done per the plans and dimensions submitted. 3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Dept. relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. DECISION ON THE PETITION OF CHARLES & PAULETTE PULEO FOR A VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT AT 5 FREEMAN ROAD, SALEM page three G y 4 . Petitioners shall obtain a building permit prior to constructia.� 5. A Certificate of Occupancy is to be obtained. 6. Exterior finishes of the proposed construction shall be in harmony':lwll h y the existing structure. I ,p �9N y s Variance and Special Permit Granted May 18, 1994 Gary M. Barrett, Member 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 MGL 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 MGL 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 i of -'-5ttlem, �Eagsadjusdts ✓y is �Bnttrb of Au}1eu1 DECISION ON THE PETITION OF CHARLES & PAULETTE PULEO FOR VARIANCES AND SPECIAL PERMIT AT 5 FREEMAN ROAD (R-1) A hearing on this petition was held May 18, 1994 with the following Board Members present: Stephen Touchette, Acting Chairman; Stephen O'Grady, Gary Barrett and Associate Member Nina Cohen. Member Hill was present but excused himself from the proceedings because of his personal relationship with the Petitions. 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, owners of the property, are requesting a Variance and Special Permit to expand and extend side setback to allow the rebuilding of a screened in porch and a deck. The property is located in the Residential Single Family District (R-1) . The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to this request for a Special Permit is section 5-3(j ) , which provides as follows: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing in this Ordinance, the Board of Appeal may, in accordance with the procedure and conditions set forth in Section 8-6 and 9-4, grant Special Permits for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming structures, and for changes, enlargement, extension or expansion of nonconforming lots, land, structures, and uses, provided, however, that such change, extension, enlargement or expansion shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to the neighborhood. In more general terms, this Board is, when reviewing Special Permit requests, guided by the rule 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, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants. The Variances which have 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 or structures in the same district. B. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner. DECISION ON THE PETITION OF CHARLES & PAULETTE PULED FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT AND VARIANCE AT 5 FREEMAN ROAD, SALEM Gy page two C. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the;I""I public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the M yy intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance. s The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. There was no opposition to the petitioners proposal. 2. Neighbors of the petitioners and abutters to the subject property appeared in support of the petition. 3. The porch and deck to be constructed by the petitioners will be identical to one which previously existed on the site and which was removed by the petitioners upon learning that said porch and deck encroached upon side yard setback. 4 . The only physical exterior change to the structure to be constructed will be that a portion of the porch and deck will now be screened. 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 Ordinance would involve substantial hardship on the petitioner. 3. The relief requested 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. 4. The Special Permit granted can be granted in harmony with the neighborhood and will promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the city's inhabitants. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 4-0, to grant the relief requested, subject to the following conditions: 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statutes, codes ordinances and regulations . 2. All construction shall be done per the plans and dimensions submitted. 3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Dept. relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. DECISION ON THE PETITION OF CHARLES & PAULETTE PULEO FOR A VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT AT 5 FREEMAN ROAD, SALEM page three G n y 1 4. Petitioners shall obtain a building permit prior to constructi6,ii.� 5. A Certificate of Occupancy is to be obtained. y p 6. Exterior finishes of the proposed construction shall be in harmony"`,W-1h , � the existing structure. t4 4 S- Variance and Special Permit Granted May 18, 1994 Gary M. Barrett, Member 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 MGL 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 MGL 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 ofttlem, � ttssrzcltuse##s ✓y `a �3ottrD of �kpeal u DECISION ON THE PETITION OF CHARLES & PAULETTE PULEO FOR VARIANCES AND SPECIAL PERMIT AT 5 FREEMAN ROAD (R-1) A hearing on this petition was held May 18, 1994 with the following Board Members present: Stephen Touchette, Acting Chairman; Stephen O'Grady, Gary Barrett and Associate Member Nina Cohen. Member Hill was present but excused himself from the proceedings because of his personal relationship with the Petitions. 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, owners of the property, are requesting a Variance and Special Permit to expand and extend side setback to allow the rebuilding of a screened in porch and a deck. The property is located in the Residential Single Family District (R-1) . The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to this request for a Special Permit is section 5-3(j ) , which provides as follows: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing in this Ordinance, the Board of Appeal may, in accordance with the procedure and conditions set forth in Section 8-6 and 9-4, grant Special Permits for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming structures, and for changes, enlargement, extension or expansion of nonconforming lots, land, structures, and uses, provided, however, that such change, extension, enlargement or expansion shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to the neighborhood. In more general terms, this Board is, when reviewing Special Permit requests, guided by the rule 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, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants. The Variances which have 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 or structures in the same district. B. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner. I DECISION ON THE PETITION OF CHARLES & PAULETTE PULEO FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT AND VARIANCE AT 5 FREEMAN ROAD, SALEM Gy page two t 0 LP C. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to thee!,. -', public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the y intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance. Y s The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. There was no opposition to the petitioners proposal. 2. Neighbors of the petitioners and abutters to the subject property appeared in support of the petition. 3. The porch and deck to be constructed by the petitioners will be identical to one which previously existed on the site and which was removed by the petitioners upon learning that said porch and deck encroached upon side yard setback. 4. The only physical exterior change to the structure to be constructed will be that a portion of the porch and deck will now be screened. 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 Ordinance would involve substantial hardship on the petitioner. 3 . The relief requested 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. 4. The Special Permit granted can be granted in harmony with the neighborhood and will promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the city's inhabitants. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 4-0, to grant the relief requested, subject to the following conditions: 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statutes, codes ordinances and regulations. 2. All construction shall be done per the plans and dimensions submitted. 3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Dept. relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. DECISION ON THE PETITION OF CHARLES & PAULETTE PULED FOR A VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT AT 5 FREEMAN ROAD, SALEM page three G n y 4. Petitioners shall obtain a building permit prior to constructia., 5. A Certificate of Occupancy is to be obtained. - y p ` o. Exterior finishes of the proposed construction shall be in harm0 ny1ih y the existing structure. ms's i s Variance and Special Permit Granted May 18, 1994 -Al Gary I Barrett, Member 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 MGL 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 MGL 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 S yI DATE OF HEARING 1� PETITIONER /�7 LOCATION MOTION: TO GRANTx� C SECOND © � AMENDMENT SECOND TO DENY SECOND TO RE-HEAR SECOND WITHDRAW SECOND CONTINUE _ } SECOND ROLL CALL PRESENT GRANT DENY DENY I `AMEND WITHDRAW RE-HEAR CONTINUE ?GARY M. BARRETT `" T 1fSf.CLTgJi.'LLS� lI1 LL '/STEPHEN O'GRADY ,STEPHEN TOUCHETTE ASSOCIATE MEMBERS NINA V. COHEN ARTHUR LEBRECQUE CONDITIONS: 05-03-94.06:42:35.40833-L MAY CITY OF SALEM BOARD OF APPEALS 745-9595 Ext. 381 Will hold a public hearing for all persons inter- ested in the petition submitted by CHARLES & PAULETTE PULEO for a Variance and/or Special Permit to allow rebuilding of screened porch and a deck at 5 FREEMAN ROAD(11-1).Said hearing to be held WEDNESDAY,MAY 18,1994 AT 6:00 P.M., ONE SALEM GREEN, 2nd Floor. STEPHEN TOUCHETTE, Vice Chairman May 4, 11, 1994 SN40833 05-03-94.06:42:35.40833-LMAY 05-03-94.06:42735.40833-LMAY - + CITY OF SALEM CITY OF SALEM BOARD OF APPEALS BOARD OF APPEALS 745-9595 Ext. 381745-9595 Ext. 381 Will hold a public hearing for all persons inter- Will hold a public hearing for all persons inter- ested in the petition submitted by CHARLES & ested in the petition submitted by CHARLES & PAULETTE PULEO for a Variance and/or Special PAULETTE PULEO for a Variance and/or Special Permit to allow rebuilding of screened porch and Permit to allow rebuilding of screened porch and a deck at 5 FREEMAN ROAD(11-1).Said hearing a deck at 5 FREEMAN ROAD(R-1).Said hearing to be held WEDNESDAY,MAY 18,1994 AT 6:00 to be held WEDNESDAY,MAY 18, 1994 AT 6:00 P.M., ONE SALEM GREEN, 2nd Floor. P.M., ONE SALEM GREEN, 2nd Floor. STEPHEN TOUCHETTE, Vice Chairman STEPHEN TOUCHETTE, Vice Chairman May 4, 11, 1994 SN40833 May 4, 11, 1994 SN40833 j ?PEA! .=SE 'i0. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IIIfIlPTIi, Cc'ISgfIL�Il2SPff$ 'Euura of Appeal TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS: -he UndersigDed represent that he is are 'he owners or a certain parcel of land located ;s 'M. . . . . . . i=R.ee .??.yw zK4... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Street; Zoning District. ./.?. -/. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . and said oarcei s arfected by Sectionisl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ;T - le 9assacnusetts State Building Code. Plans aescribing the work proposed, have been submitted to the Inspector of Buildings in accordance with Section IX A. 1 of the Zoning Ordinance. r� m v (V W L"S W ^V, C.J The Application for Permit was denied by the Inspector of Buildings for the following reasons: The Undersigned hereby petitions the Board of Appeals to vary the terms of the Salem Zoning Ordinance and/or the Building Code and order the Inspector of Buildings to approve the application fee permit to build as filed, as the enforcement of said Zoning By-Laws and Building Code would involve practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship to the Undersigned and relief may be granted without substantially dero- gating from the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance and Building Code for the following reasons: p Owner C//,g"-[l-:�T ! ij�� d/4�c<rTr Address.��/��erigy .� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Telephone. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . P e t i ti o n e r . . . . . . . . .�jy ?.e: S,!h , //�i. L;,d. Address . . /�!f?c 1'??'•t• .�f�! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -,ate. . . . . . . . . . . -elepnone. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3y. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Three copies of the application must be filed with the Secretary of the Board of appeais with a check, for advertising in the amount of. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . *our weeks prior to the meeting of the Board of Appeals . Check payable to The venins News. >_ - _ t _ _� _ --, :, .� z = -_ _ - = o Z O v' ? _ Z � > Z '� '.� � '. '� ' _ Z Z N > .- =i C O � � Z G G _ >_ � n ❑ ❑ �� ` � _ � -- t I ZA S MgRcq,+N0 T Romeo W O ,4 AQoVE &A4V•")'� 6 P'"L /�?Rop' once It' LOT- 1p o A -q 000S,f z' 7 2 ST°R �0''` ✓F WEGP'7py A K 0 0 0 x Lor / DoT 2 33./3 N , ' 5-{/'I.ln DAD � REEMAr♦ NOTE+ PLOT PLAN OF LAND IN SALEM, MASS. ALL TIES SUBJECT TO WHAT AN ACCURATE INSTRUMENT SURVEY WOULD REVEAL, THIS PLOT PLAN IS NOT TO BE PREPARED BY: USED FOR PROPERTY LINE DETERMINATION, THE LOCATION OF t� DF MEDFORD ENGINEERING dr SJRVEY FENCES OR THE LOCATION OF ANY OTHER STRUCTURES, �. `Lf 15 HALL ST. MEDFORD, MA. 02155 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE BUILDING IS LOCATED ON THE dr Csl � ANGELO B. VEN EZIANO-P.E.dr P.L.S. GROUND AS SHOWN, AN6El0 � �. & �;• AN ELO B.aVEN FAX{: 396-8052 yGNF21lM0 w` , Mo, 2Q42 SCALE, 1 30 F RFS PEF�� DEED REF,, /x,('. 4399 P6. 699 SU.Z`1F'y DATE, y/: Oq`I ANGELO B, VENEZIANO - P.E. 6 P.IdS. DATE, FILE No., /(o - 19S-9y LA S MARct��NT Ro.40 w 0 AQuv- GAev�D 6� P"e1 �R op. O F-CY o Lt.T tl LoT io o A _q 000s,F z' - P Pa op SCREEN joo,'cN s_ 2 STORE W£GRzYN AK 0 0 �o-r 2 a 4 ' X893 SF N � LOAD � REEMAr� NOTE+ PLOT PLAN OF LAND IN SALEM , MASS, ALL TIES SUBJECT TO WHAT AN ACCURATE INSTRUMENT SURVEY WOULD REVEAL. THIS PLOT PLAN IS NOT TO BE PREPARED BY: USED FOR PROPERTY LINE DETERMINATION, THE LOCATION OF DF MEDFORD ENGINEERING & SURVEY FENCES OR THE LOCATION OF ANY OTHER STRUCTURES, �1�N ^ . 15 HALL ST. MEDFORD, MA. 02155 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE BUILDING IS LOCATED ON THE ANGELO B. VENEZIANO-P.E.hP.LS, GROUND AS SHOWN, ANG8EL0 'e (617)396-4466 FAX#: 396-8052 yGNFZ11No :.+� SCALES 1 = 30 ' Ib 24;)42 DEED REF.- 13K. 6399 P6. 69$ ! \ i 1 �'�/ .YiN-�" (�r�yvc✓ y by SU4i`!F'y DATES '115-1-741 ANGELO 3, VENEZIANO - P.E. 4 PAwS, DATEi FILE No., /6p - l9S-9y ISI ,yyRcµf}u�- Romeo w 0 .rIQC4E G-keye•D g+ POOL ROP. O F-GY Ler r/ g LOT- /0 0 4 A -q 000s,F t 2 ST°a� i W•EGR7 M '4 K 0 o_ 7-or4L A:/a,A9js,A- II + x Lor / Lo-r 2 a a.= X893 SF. N _ 33.113" N � ' tti 5-q 2� I�oAD f REE MA rl NOTE+ PLOT PLAN OF LAND IN SALEM, MASS, ALL TIES SUBJECT TO WHAT AN ACCURATE INSTRUMENT SURVEY WOULD REVEAL. THIS PLOT PLAN IS NOT TO BE _ PREPARED BY: USED FOR PROPERTY LINE DETERMINATION, THE LOCATION OF Of MEDFORD ENGINEERING k SURVEY FENCES OR THE LOCATION OF ANY OTHER STRUCTURES 15 HALL ST. MEDFORD, MA. 02155 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE BUILDING IS LOCATED ON THE $i �c3G\ ANGELO 8. VENEZIANO-P.E.&P.L.S. GROUND AS SHOWN. AMGEl0 0 ,. (617)396-4466 FAX#: 396-8052 j{p.F14, 24J42 H� SCALE, 1 - 30 AfG R�� DEED REF,, g ('. G384 P6. 696 I/�' I ,Y/�-" ✓ y SI9y 9 S by DATEt y15-1911 ANGELO B. VENEZIANO - P.E. L P.O.- DATES FILE No,, /f49 - I9S-9y -PPEA.L SE ?.0. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . tit U of '75�tt1Pm, ussarhusleffs 'Bnttra of rA�yl�y�eul 1 I �Pmrt. TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS: ne Onaersig�nea represent that he is are ``e owners of a certain parcel of land locatt�ggd � . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Street; Zoning District. .! 7 0. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : --no saia oarcei is affect-pa by Sectionisj . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ;r Erle '!assacnusetts State Building Code. Tans cescribina the work proposed, have been submitted to the Inspector of Buildings in ccoroance with Section IX A. 1 of the Zoning Ordinance. i n a E— CO LQ T O 4.J LU Ln r W LU LL n' Un �n The Application for Permit was denied by the Inspector of Buildings for the following reasons: The Undersigned hereby petitions the Board of Appeals to vary the terms of the Salem Zonina Ordinance and/or the Building Code and order the Inspector of Buildings to approve the application fee permit to build as filed, as the enforcement of said Zoning By-Laws and Building Code would involve practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship to the Undersigned and relief may be granted without substantially dero- gating from the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance and Building Code for the following reasons: Owner L. !f? /rr%S Address. ��4P� .ri . . . . . . . . . . . Telephone. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Petitioner.(f/"�?4*�. . . . . . . . address . . j����>`✓dt9. !.�14' , . . . . . . . . . . L/'//� ate. . . . . . . . . . . . . .y - '74 By. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Three copies of the application must be filed with the Secretary of the Board of appeals with a check, for advertising in the amount of. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tour ,weeks prior to the meeting of the Board of Appeals. Check payable to The Evening News. - _ z o r z z 0 a LA S ROAD W O �4 AQdvt Gaev r 6 PueL PRoP. O FCY o Lt 7' LOT- 1p o A _41,000S,F z' y s_ °' PeoP. SCR FEN /004[/1 ( �jroD S 1 Ko• � EG-RzYHj'AK o° o_ x Lor 2 a A ' \8 q3 S,F. Lo 33,Y3 N 1 �Z o AD f REEM�� NOTE: PLOT PLAN OF LAND IN SALEM , MASS. ALL TIES SUBJECT TO WHAT AN ACCURATE INSTRUMENT SURVEY WOULD REVEAL. THIS PLOT PLAN IS NOT TO BE PREPARED BY: !USED FOR PROPERTY LINE DETERMINATION, THE LOCATION OF pf MEDFORO ENOINEERINC 5'JRVEY FENCES OR THE LOCATION OF ANY OTHER STRUCTURES. �N $y^ 115 HALL ST. MEDFORD, VA. 02155 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE BUILDING IS LOCATED ON THE 4 '��r.,'•+ AN B. VENEZIANO-P.E.dcP.L.S. GROUND AS SHOWN. ANGELO �� (617)396-4466 FAX#: 396-8052 9 yr,NFZ1AM0Hi No. 24,)42 i SCALE, 1,I= 30 ' 'c�'1) ' DEED REF,- /3,x. 4384 P6. 69g `9F6KT 9p IFyDATE, `7'159`/ ANGELO B. VENEZIANO-- P,E; L P,L . DATES IFILE No., /(p CI TV HALL. ........... p el'v"T E L 2 2 2 kti 'CE . ..... 0� I I a 310 4 3 4 SUBJECT PROPERTYt MAP i L'C?T FIROF'f"'.R.Ty A'DORF'S, 0005 ROAD 7 • ..II .III.. II.........I, ,..,.- E'Frr, I 0 0 — I .. E 12 11 14 • 14r 0'21"'> PUILJ;'(, CHARLE$ M FREEMAN PD 17 A,G R K'I J E p H ......... SIT" 'A Q 1�3 �R(AiXy' ts'A TREE—f'�e 14 I.S I I 1 11�I I I I I I 1 1,1 1 11 1 1 11 1 1 1 1.9..I I I...I. F191 W D 18 • I.....I.I..Ill. . . ........... ......................... ...... 15 �I�'",l I�V, 6ie.6' to r 1113 1", 1.I.I.I . I...I.I. I I. 1 201 16 FICA-"A-1L. Pf--K f l., I A FIA 0-1-",570 21 • 17 22 ROA D P.TMTO MARZY 8 FREEMAN KyAl") 4 C-1,2 8'3 E24 19 Aq 5-15 7Q ...... z k ............. itiE, ........ 2Z •20 N I. • I I I ......... e,%%" :� " IS M MA I -�j ig I I.I.I Iel ze 44 Im 11"Mi'.42'Ill p A�'�r 22 P 23 2] LANARW SINAMOUCH C CSALEM MA 0-19-110 3 3 0 21 0 0 0 0 3 f-11f"EMPO R(.AD PULF-0 CHARL.E.S' 3 f-*Rt­.F-f1AN P(-,A(-, • 24 c 25 ..I..I I I I I I I......I I.I I..I....I I I .I I...I..I I..33 .................. • 66& C ........... rrfE ......... 26 34 35 4;� .................. • 27 ........... 36 2837 SALJ17 �'m MA 01 ,70•29 38 1a. r; rrir . 0 S'(Rr-f--I Or.luLls p A I R I 1j S" f 39 30 40 31 . . o..c.j-j.�.cj V4 L'.y I rf�'A C' .. ......... r. f 1 , kL (" 1..I...I 12 I.I.I.I.I I................. . 41 • 2 ............ 4 11 11 1, 71, ............1,1 .......... I............... • ...... I I I I I.I. 43 33 ......... I I.I I I I....I I.. 34 CiAMPA 1111A1I1f")( SALEM MA 019-1104s 4 35 6 0 300 000& ROM) PlAi-A-,tIBB44 DAVIC- A J R 6 y RD 47 • 36 j t I I 16 �o 'J' o 48 37 1`4 50 .. ........"I I.I I I.I I. I.I..I I..I I I'. •38 I ... ........... ........I .......... r; M I I I I I.I I I I I .................I I • 39 .....I ...... IQ 1 51 521 :3 40 PE)-.ANf'Z'.R K R rZOGAL D r". TM"i SAL.Em MA 01.19"M •41 14 03 14 0010 FRN-DIAN ROAD HNTO PTEW"N A ROA0 55 • 42 • 56 HOAR NAN('Y r. �;Al--'m ovni'o ' 43 ............I . .........—I". 57 I I..I I.....I I.I.I.I 44 58 ........ 59 ......... .............I 45 ........... ..........I so .......................... 46 61 •47 62 • 631 48 84 I............ 65 ........ .. ........... I.I I.I ........ .... 66 50 ............... % 67 ......... .....I.I I I 1 68 52 69 0 53 700 71 54 72 55 ...... .................... 1"R% Pi, CIAROI 73 ...... 74 56 ....... ..... .....I.. "I I e I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 17�5 0 1" % % AS$E 0 r .......... • a.;�64 \ y dm �N� Q• \\ °'S \\ � O o a o r�m � CPQ 10000 1s ' cJ' •o \ '00's `\ 100' \ .\a2 13 0• ��P No \ i145,s o N - m 1p cl ,p \ �d� 2 If) ch p I i CCN 115\ s ssOQ O �� a b�y'. 1 1 I \\ •` '�_ 10e CJ • fid, o' ��*� '' I i \ < 1 IN CJ O o I IPI I \ I `. �` • Irc7 ' � �*� � � � 90,00' / t � w WALL-j Aacv� ta.�.•o s' R o �cr POOLf• •P. I �- C ..- � . - . . `..-� - F - � _`tr.- ' °'� ' a.- ' ��eP SCR�f.✓ PDdth ��.{ f J41ft-41C fV7'TIN4 I:,71:-AL) 3C a 4k ]•.AI AT OECD - DNOfU/ S / �U0�1/ti55 � No o r/f WEr,RZYN;AK Fxri, 17LA6 G CE K p yy L �11 0- f04 NEW tl41/.46 Co.Jt7] •; JNS •� T71t1rJ+J �i rteLA_/o99l1� 1 pa.31` i' Wt!"71 £'4L• YCo 1z Qf-T2- 0 q3 --- i I ! LOT 2-- ° � S 111 f'tA)4 HD S � CALE 1 -r 340 D" FXi�jflriC �' LINE 0� WA!L ++ CD V i l HoIj t: { W o ^CC,.Qtf•1 er' �-• MWMW !•;EEN�G POk'Cf{ N �I N El WALL� + _ E txI%il 1 '� '/' 9[tK --- I !L Q U) VAV-1 W K5'( ELfVA11o4 O � 0 O i = a \ cc t 70 - Azov ux�r:• � v, '� _ 5Wr-V AREA HAsunK �i� /9"veue� mve/rn4i o¢ R�.�nE2 N "E OLv KA7F -R[MOvE t,wOnmaa� _ _ 70 Ol ow. o< m cc - - - �_ •,O hill Vol - o c I•,; ' Ar so esg Jov. 7 REVISIONS: � Ex 11,a rooriw J •. r .. Al- DATE. 17fhf= 19' 1w+ ��I/L,��N� DbcK►N4 � t3EdEL5�2�E*15 .,- ' �oR'rH � L�v�,'r1or� � _ 7•�OK L`O OA1 SI?�, k %ERED A,; 66ALE '1a I '- o " Zk. CLA IN ', ALt ISG' E - CON ,r<-PAC'TUrs To vieelr--( A\LL 6oN011-10"5, DIMrN51a�1s, fl&'AMA0 IPO, fx15'fIN�" b,-T SITE. CoKtTt;?LC"7a2 WILL a6TA1M AI•.IC> AVHfxe FDWg• NO. -1a ALL �i r/XTE C017Gti } LOCAL Tr��;ULA i�CauS VL �'' '` • �/- � _ MARCHf}�lT ROAD ;, .1 � W — ■. i O I� 1 Wd4��-� •' MoVG w..o )PROP, oxece 8a POOL f• Lor )l i o A _ q 000S.F '4iv _ _ ... Y: •r s. �tep SC1'IfN Pot(h fyoLff) +:, $'.0('N '7 AL) 31" r.45 ' /- 2 SToa� AT DECK 8 ; : / o yu6 G Df,�K } h fOf� NEw $TSPS t- ,1•- / 7 rD�,,LA_/o,evfrr. 1 I. 293 t.! 33.v3 '0 AP ,T I FXiS'`!9 ONE OG WA.,L V rn I o tJt�•� : i EENEf> P017ck 977 r = m M �`�SU � c tip,.:•/a - �" ± T—� i L ' U) m 5 '� •� r' W.��L� i If �i � fha fl;. l` i "LA'S _ E (�. V o CID J� 0 1 K co O -- — -- ---- =------ Z C a fi o U) )ME of Ivf.v 200E V -O , . . : - . ' OAVPV ARf%4 flAsw /9"Oaue(1 mue.aACa aK a�ssL.e >_ \ QU7 I(QQL -f(fMOVE �•� � -� - - TO OC 364L(f/r i!y rwNF t - — /11/ —Rl'MOVAf51.E X,xEE.JS Q nl U _i _q _ .. 71 '•'k)vr:'` r,, 6(1511,15 BEVFLCv �-y .►. _ � 1 t , __ _ _ A ;� ON f/7E -TO 9� kY`iiStA 4 � T Se, 0 + REVISIONS :- rD . -- - J, --- — x s-� -i- ----_--- DATE: �• S `,' • �i��i>v{ p�C1CIN� + BEJEL gCREEM4 �G (Z-rH 1O�4 6CALE ,CALF 11�•f � i ' v '' � �`- _i (JG�E C�►�T!'>nCTOl� TO VE12ftr-r' ALL lONt71t10�1�j, l�tMttJSIaIJS, ��rfMF% U RQ. �XIS�IN� �`f 51?E Co�'"T12.ACTU2 WILL 4�1Af�..{ t��.Ir7 ADt�}'EIZE, DEW w ' O. -p At.L h�ic'i� cGl�c<� 4- Loe-AL M ;JL-A-nn0145 _ g' IV IMF 11;