13-13 1/2 MEADOW STREET - ZBA (2) 13-13z Meadow St. B-4
- — H. Drew Romonavoitz - --- —
of Salem, ��usstttljusetts A
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF H.DREW ROMANbVITZ FOR A VARIANCES AT
13-13 1/2 MEADOW STREET (B-4)
A hearing on this petition was held October 20, 1993 with the
following Board Members present: Francis Grealish Jr. , Chairman;
George Ahmed, Stephen Touchette 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.
The Board of Appeal,after hearing the evidence presented and at the
request of the petitioner's attorney voted unanimously 4-0 to grant
leave to withdraw this petition for Variances to allow this existing
nonconforming lot containing two residential dwellings to be divided
into two nonconforming lots. The property is located in a B-4
district.
GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE
October 20, 1993
�._/-�...�,�a.I�G v% Ci b_:"GC=L-✓SCJ
Francis X. Grealish, Chairman
Board of Appeal
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE
CITY CLERK.
I '
of ;Ulem, C ttssttrljusetts ,
er �3attra of �upeal c,r, ''
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF H.DREW ROMANOVITZ FOR A VARIANCES AT
13-13 1/2 MEADOW STREET (B-4)
A hearing on this petition was held October 20, 1993 with the
following Board Members present: Francis Grealish Jr. , Chairman;
George Ahmed, Stephen Touchette 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.
The Board of Appeal,after hearing the evidence presented and at the
request of the petitioner's attorney voted unanimously 4-0 to grant
leave to withdraw this petition for Variances to allow this existing
nonconforming lot containing two residential dwellings to be divided
into two nonconforming lots. The property is located in a B-4
district.
GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE
October 20, 1993
Francis X. Grealish, Chairman
Board of Appeal
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE
CITY CLERK.
J
of $Ulem, 'Tassarliusetts ,
goQ._ s Pourd of 'Au}Teal
_ N
YiZ,
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF H.DREW ROMANOVITZ FOR A VARIANCES AT
13-13 1/2 MEADOW STREET (B-4)
A hearing on this petition was held October 20, 1993 with the
following Board Members present: Francis Grealish Jr. , Chairman;
George Ahmed, Stephen Touchette 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.
The Board of Appeal,after hearing the evidence presented and at the
request of the petitioner's attorney voted unanimously 4-0 to grant
leave to withdraw this petition for Variances to allow this existing
nonconforming lot containing two residential dwellings to be divided
into two nonconforming lots. The property is located in a B-4
district.
GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE
October 20, 1993
Francis X. Grealish, Chairman
Board of Appeal
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE
CITY CLERK.
of 'Salem, �9ttssadjusetts
Pnttra of AFPenl
N-SS
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF H.DREW ROMANOVITZ FOR A VARIANCES AT
13-13 1/2 MEADOW STREET (B-4)
A hearing on this petition was held October 20, 1993 with the
following Board Members present: Francis Grealish Jr. , Chairman;
George Ahmed, Stephen Touchette 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.
The Board of Appeal,after hearing the evidence presented and at the
request of the petitioner's attorney voted unanimously 4-0 to grant
leave to withdraw this petition for Variances to allow this existing
nonconforming lot containing two residential dwellings to be divided
into two nonconforming lots: The property is located in a B-4
district.
GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE
October 20, 1993 1
iy
Francis X. Grealish, Chairman
Board of Appeal
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE
CITY CLERK.
ofttlem, � flttssttcl�usetts
x �
�Raara of 'Appeal
S;
�S
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF H.DREW ROMANOVITZ FOR A VARIANCES AT
13-13 1/2 MEADOW STREET (B-4)
A hearing on this petition was held October 20, 1993 with the
following Board Members present: Francis Grealish Jr. , Chairman;
George Ahmed, Stephen Touchette 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.
The Board of Appeal,after hearing the evidence presented and at the
request of the petitioner's attorney voted unanimously 4-0 to grant
leave to withdraw this petition for Variances to allow this existing
nonconforming lot containing two residential dwellings to be divided
into two nonconforming lots. The property is located in a B-4
district.
GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE
October 20, 1993
Francis X. Grealish, Chairman
Board of Appeal
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE
CITY CLERK.
Tity of Salem, 'T- ttssadlusetts 4
' �Roara of Av#reul
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF H.DREW ROMANOVITZ FOR A VARIANCES AT
13-13 1/2 MEADOW STREET (B-4)
A hearing on this petition was held October 20, 1993 with the
following Board Members present: Francis Grealish Jr. , Chairman;
George Ahmed, Stephen Touchette 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.
The Board of Appeal,after hearing the evidence presented and at the
request of the petitioner's attorney voted unanimously 4-0 to grant
leave to withdraw this petition for Variances to allow this existing
nonconforming lot containing two residential dwellings to be divided
into two nonconforming lots. The property is located in a B-4
district.
GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE
October 20, 1993
Francis X. Grealish, Chairman
Board of Appeal
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE
CITY CLERK.
V DATE OF .:EARING 6 AZO
1 !
PETITIONER
'OTION: TO GRANT SECOND
TO DENY SECOND
TO RE-NEAR SECOND
EAVE TO WITHDRAW SECOND
'70 CONTINUE �� SECOND
ROLL CALL PRESENT GRANT DENY WITHDRAW RE-HEAR CONTINUE
GEORGE A. AHMED
FRANCIS GREALISH d/
i4WAo s
STEPHEN TOUCHETTE
ASSOC:7,TE :iEMBERS
ARTHUR LABRECOUE
CONDITIONS:
(gity of . ttlem, � ttssttcl�usetts
3oQ.; s nttrD of upeal
�ss
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF H.DREW ROMANOVITZ FOR A VARIANCES AT
13-13 1/2 MEADOW STREET (B-4)
A hearing on this petition was held October 20, 1993 with the
following Board Members present: Francis Grealish Jr. , Chairman;
George Ahmed, Stephen Touchette 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.
The Board of Appeal,after hearing the evidence presented and at the
request of the petitioner's attorney voted unanimously 4-0 to grant
leave to withdraw this petition for Variances to allow this existing
nonconforming lot containing two residential dwellings to be divided
into two nonconforming lots. The property is located in a B-4
district.
GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE
October 20, 1993
Francis X. Grealish, Chairman
Board of Appeal
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE
CITY CLERK.
(9ity of Ilem, 'Tassadjusetts
144
j s �Battra of AuPad c/r. i
IQ
cV Sg
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF H.DREW ROMANOVITZ FOR A VARIANCES AT
13-13 1/2 MEADOW STREET (B-4)
A hearing on this petition was held October 20, 1993 with the
following Board Members present: Francis Grealish Jr. , Chairman;
George Ahmed, Stephen Touchette 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.
The Board of Appeal,after hearing the evidence presented and at the
request of the petitioner's attorney voted unanimously 4-0 to grant
leave to withdraw this petition for Variances to allow this existing
nonconforming lot containing two residential dwellings to be divided
into two nonconforming lots. The property is located in a B-4
district.
GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE
October 20, 1993
Francis X. Grealish, Chairman
Board of Appeal
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE
CITY CLERK.
of SaIrm, � ttsstttljusetts
"e �Rpttra of AFPVai CiTy y
t7
4... r,
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF H.DREW ROMANOVITZ FOR A VARIANCES AT
13-13 1/2 MEADOW STREET (B-4)
A hearing on this petition was held October 20, 1993 with the
following Board Members present: Francis Grealish Jr. , Chairman;
George Ahmed, Stephen Touchette 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.
The Board of Appeal,after hearing the evidence presented and at the
request of the petitioner's attorney voted unanimously 4-0 to grant
leave to withdraw this petition for Variances to allow this existing
nonconforming lot containing two residential dwellings to be divided
into two nonconforming lots. The property is located in a B-4
district.
GRANTED LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE
October 20, 1993
Francis X. Grealish, Chairman
Board of Appeal
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE
CITY CLERK.
CITY OF SALEM
,Y- BOARD OF APPEAL
745-9595 Ext. 331
Will hold a public hearing f'or all persons inter-
ested in the petition submitted by If. DREW
ROMANOVIT7, for Variances to divide property
at 13-13'A MEADOW ST. (B-4) into two noncon-
forming lots, there will be no changes in use &
no new construction. Said hearing to be held
WEDNESDAY,OCTOBER 20, 1993 A'1'G:00 P.M.,
ONE SALEM GREEN, second floor.
FRANCIS X.GREALISH, Jr., Chairman
October G, 13, 1993 SN22486
�i
I
.i
i
I
0 10.0 SPPAGE II
FW RTT
N9/24/93 0532
Y I
I
i
CITY or
B021 nonan or APrrAt
hold it pol1S h 9 rin,L�3ftl
csLed in theK ill persons intcr•-
aL 13 13 'OVI'P!IorrVariancesL(od UY It. nIlrw
lbr-mi MrADOW ST. (R-4 divide property
pg lO�s. there will ben roto IW
-no new constl'uc(ion ° changes in°peon_
R'rnNr$n Said hea Use g
ON S AY,OC7`OarR 20,1993 Lo Uc held
ALCM Gnu se second ATO°OOP,
PR CIS X Roor, nt•
October 6, 13, 1993 • GRPALISIi, Tr., Chair
man
—. S 2248
8 �
M
k`
m *`
3
IM
2
m �
1
APPEAL CASE NO. .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Q14 of *dent, Aussar4useffs
art,
paurb of ( }"Zal SEP 2! 2 20 PH '93
CITY OF SALEM. MASS
TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS: CLERK'S OFFICE
The Undersi ned represent that he is are the owners of a certain parcel of land located
at NO. . . . . 1 } Meadow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . „ „ .Street; Zoning District A.-4 . .
; .and said parcel is affected by Section(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
of the Massachusetts State Building Code.
Plans describing the work proposed, have been submitted to the Inspector of Buildings in
accordance with Section IX A. 1 of the Zoning Ordinance.
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:
The Petitioner proposes to subdivide the existing lot with two buildings on it into
two lots, each with a building on it: one a single family, and the other a multi-family.
The existing lot is non-conforming with respect to certain dimensional requirements.
The new lots would therefore retain those non-conformities, would increase the existing non
conformity regarding lot area, and would result in creating an additional non-conformity
relating to the side yard and rear yard setback (Lot B) , even though no new structures
would be added, since the lot line dividing the two lots would create a non-conformity.
However the existing non-conformity relating to the ordinance's prohibition on two princi-
pal buildings on one lot would be cured. The petitioner requests that the board grant
him the required special permit relating to increasing the lot area non-conformity; grant
him the variance from side-yead setback, and grant- such other relief which would permit the
proposed subdivision. The existing ownership s twat on creates a hardship in that the
property is not marketable and that it is unique among the lots within the district. Re-
lief granted would be consistent with Owner. H. Drew Romanovitz
the intent of the zoning .ordingance. Richard W. Stafford, Esq.
Address PIP.Tiptir, Qpinn & SavoY.. P.c.
222 Essex Street, Salem, Mass.
Telephore. 745-8817. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Petitioner. owner. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
DlIgtember 21, 1993
Address. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Tel Ph . . . . . . . . . . .
By.!/GYV.' . . . . . .
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. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . .
four weeks prior to the meeting of the Board of Appeals. Check payable to The
Evening News.
NO....................................
PETITION TO BOARD OF APPEALS
LOCATION
................................................................
PETITIONER..........................................
ADDRESS...............................................
................................................
CONDII IONS
.................................................................
........................ .......................................
................................................................
.................................................................
................................................................
.................................................................
PETITION APPROVED....................
DENIED.........................
.................................................... 19.........
OCEAN AVENUE
N 820 09 ' 00" W
ROBERT J. Le BLANC,
JOSHUA a CLAIRE L . DESCH[
3)TE I N o 0
Q Q
D of 1928 o LAWRENCE J. o
a NANCY E .
MOO N EY
r� N
rn O �-
7i T
J f!
,,n N
Om
N 820 09' 00" W
mr
58. 94 ' w w
07±
tiMQ oo
a ° GEORGE T. ,rn � ti SUSAN M .
0) Q
►N T . Bi - z GALLANT
N . 00':
SARA L. 0PLAN PLAN 431 OF 1 �
ti `S 810 30'00" E _ S 8 I ° 30'00 " E
L L Q 30.00' - 9
U w
- / W- _
0 % Q f UN /- Q
Q o
} V) Q
3 a 9' -
cQo = 3 ------ ai co
rn m
SLOT B ioQ U0 ti
I,800+ o= ' g N // o
9'
z
N0. 13 / Q Q
�cwR i
r
' TO HAZEL ST. m a
V. 30.00 ' `
.. : 18.00' ,
-�— S 810 30' 00 " E
M E A D O W ST RE E T
Ctv of Salem, f ttssadjuseffs 1a 30 8 M 'I
k FILE*
.z s 29Dttrb of "eal CMC I LERK.SALEM.MASS.
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF H. DREW ROMANOVITZ FOR A VARIANCE
AT 13} MEADOW ST. (B-4 )
A hearing on this petition was held June 17, 1987 with the following Board Members
present: James Hacker, Chairman; Richard Bencal, Secretary; Messrs. , Fleming,
Luzinski and Associate Member Labrecque. Notice of the hrlaring was sent to abutter
and others and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem
Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A.
Petitioner is requesting a Variance from any and all applicable density:and rear
and side setback requirements to allow one parcel of land to be divided:into two
nonconforming lots. Additionally, petitioner is requesting a second variance
to allow an existing deck which encroaches on rear and sideline requirements.
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 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 district or the purpose of the Ordinance.
i
The Board of Appeal, after hearing the evidence presented at the hearing, makes
the following findings of fact:
1 . The condition of the two buildings on one lot has existed
for many years;
I 2. The deck was constructed prior to the purchase by the petitioner;
I
{ 3. The deck is used also as a means of egress.
i
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 . In regards to the division of the lot, petitioner failed
to establish hardship;
2. In regards to the deck: .
a. desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to
j the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating
from the intent of the district of the purpose ,of the Ordinance;
:i b. Literal enforcement of the Ordinance would involve substantial
hardship to the petitioner.
i
i
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF H. DREW ROMANOVITZ FOR VARIANCES
AT 13} MEADOW ST. , SALEM
page two
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 5-0 against the granting of the
Variance to allow division on one lot into two lots.
Additionally, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 5-0 to grant the variance to
allow the existing deck, subject to the following conditions:
1 . The deck remain in its present form as provided on
the plans submitted to this Board. ,.
DENIED VARIANCE TO DIVIDE
GRANTED VARIANCE TO ALLOW DECK
Richard A. Bencal, Secretary
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK
APPEAL FROM THIS DECISION. IF ANY. SHALL BE "ADE PURSUANT TO SE--TION 17 OF THE I111ASS. I
GENERAL LAWS. CHAPTER AND SH.�1L DE GAYS AFiEP. THE DATE OF FILING
OF THIS DECISION Ila THE CF' -E JF THE CIT`. CLERK.
i'o S](.1 _! 11 THE "0 PP. �Pf�l... FC'"•:IT -
GRA IEi) HEREM, Sh LL Iii''. T%. EF Ei(.T lr i'L Ar C`7` vi Tlt 4
F ICATIGN CF IRE LI'1 CLER, 1`!; :0 C. I ' ,I `-t, !' IS .
GP. THAT, IF SUCH A'. APKC! HTS BE:': II E TH'; If - i.r E OF THE .
RECORDED IN THE SOUTH ESSEX RE.ISTRY O 'F DEEDS AI I\D - D
OF RECORD OR IS RECORDED AND NOTED ON THE OYlP:ER S CERTiFV GF TITLE.
BOARD OF APPEAL
A TRUE COPY ATTEST
July 17, 1987.1 _ )
sep ne R. Fusco
CITY CLERK
SALEM, MASS.
IUD
2./3 301 30$'.
_ 106 t p .,$47 /3,0 9
K _ 106 Ree X302
iv. • 3630 . ►o;a
104. a .64
n
L 1 U F L z1 a1i a T s so W �0
:T a6 t so so W
_ S0 so
U
a 3200
85 103 102. 101 10 1,251, 5iso 96 °A 317 33.
W 23.831 5R J0 5,250 1250 5X57 99 54, M1m v o 3300 / !
- I
Q) o" 89 91 92 94 u 3506 E;
90 x
aero 319 330
»m is
100+ 'tl S T. a 321
kw— yy ,..,y. ,., s a•,•.. 3es7 329
6 IT M'E .i nls s, so so 4o 60 740 ; 32l ?65v
• oat X .30
s 3 w 6
,� 3
83 19 322 3
X593 u 73
3424 AC i 4'15 I78 76 75 m , a O
, S4 0. .. ;9 '5700 4000. 5_50 4,200 3,503 w a 01,80(
* 82
AkJ$: . 1 r.00 r., . 7,2, 323
0
$ f r 7 68 69 324
64 BQ -i fl
70 3092 » . 505 AZbC e'30
m s S r S 00 /0500 so
5y0e p ? 1,o 1 0O . p 44 04
EAST
• -1,2 6C 09 Br
• c.. VCE^ U rl � ,. y .
AVEN E
T T6 SO
s1
e 50 60 1,0
'
AVENUE EAST ;w a 6 s° so °
66 • 19 50. 9,3.
1 5,.34
io 58 �sos 5.700 53. 5,6.40 51
2 59 a 900 9 4,?c�
61, 60 4.900 450 455E 54 4. co 46
4,660 44 45 _
9,:�9 _ — r"1 '�� I_"-'l
s-1 is
APPEAL CASE NO. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
01i#V of �$211Pm, 4Rttssadjuseffs
SEP 2i 2 zo Ph '93
TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS: CITY OF SALEM. VASS
CLERK'S CF ICE
The Undersiggned represent that he is are the owners of a certain parcel of land located
at NO. . . . . 13,}, Meadow . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . „ , Street; Zoning District.B-4 . .
. . . . ; and said parcel is affected by Section(s). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
of the Massachusetts State Building Code.
Plans describing the work proposed, have been submitted to the Inspector of Buildings in
accordance with Section IX A. 1 of the Zoning Ordinance.
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:
The Petitioner proposes to subdivide the existing lot with two buildings on it into
two lots, each with a building on it: one a single family, and the other a multi-family.
The existing lot is non-conforming with respect to certain dimensional requirements.
The new lots would therefore retain those non-conformities, would increase the existing non
conformity regarding lot area, and would result in creating an additional non-conformity
relating to the side yard and rear yard setback (Lot B) , even though no new structures
would be added, since the lot line dividing the two lots would create a non-conformity.
However the existing non-conformity relating to the ordinance's prohibition on two princi-
pal buildings on one lot would be cured. The petitioner requests that the board grant
him the required special permit relating to increasing the lot area non-conformity; grant
him the variance from side-yead setback, and grant such other relief which would permit the
proposed subdivision. The existing ownership situation creates a hardship in that the
property is not marketable and that it is unique among the lots within the district. Re-
lief granted would be consistent with Owner. .x; Drew Romanovitz
the intent of the zoning .ordingance. Richard W. Stafford, Esq.
Address c(o,Tinti,, Wpn & Savoy_. P.C.
222 Essex Street, Salem, Mass.
Telephone. 74%-??17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Petitioner. owner
Address. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
elitember 21, 1993
D$�
Tele p n ... . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
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. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .
four weeks prior to the meeting of the Board of Appeals. Check payable to The
Evening News.
NO....................................
PETITION TO BOARD OF APPEALS
LOCATION
.....................................I..........................
PETITIONER..........................................
ADDRESS...............................................
...................I............................
CONDII IONS
.................................................................
........................ .......................................
................................................................
.................................................................
.................................................................
.................................................................
PETITION APPROVED.................... ❑
DENIED......................... 0
...................................................1 19.........
CXitiEiT ' S '
(t ittt of ttlem, nsea se##s 1u 30 8 so M 61
s 5 FILE#
Z �ROttrb of 'tAppeal OITY CLERK.SALEM.MASS.
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF H. DREW ROMANOVITZ FOR A VARIANCE
AT 13'2 MEADOW ST. (B-4)
A hearing on this petition was held June 17, 1987 with the .following Board Members
present: James Hacker, Chairman; Richard Bencal, Secretary; Messrs. , Fleming,
Luzinski and Associate Member Labrecque. Notice of the helaring was sent to abutter
and others and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem
Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A.
Petitioner is requesting a Variance from any and all applicable density and rear
and side setback requirements to allow one parcel of land to be divided into two
nonconforming lots. Additionally, petitioner is requesting a second variance
to allow an existing deck which encroaches on rear and sideline requirements.
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 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 district or the purpose of the Ordinance.
The Board of Appeal, after hearing the evidence presented at the hearing, makes
the following findings of fact:
1 . The condition of the two buildings on one lot has existed
for many years;
i
2. The deck was constructed prior to the purchase by the petitioner;
3. The deck is used also as a means of egress.
i
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 . In regards to the division of the lot, petitioner failed
to establish hardship;
2. In regards to the deck:
1
a. desirable relief may be 'granted without substantial detriment to
j
the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating
from the intent of the district of the purpose of the Ordinance;
i
b. Literal enforcement of the Ordinance would involve substantial
hardship to the petitioner.
I
: i
.... _.
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF H. DREW ROMANOVITZ FOR VARIANCES
AT 131 MEADOW ST. , SALEM
page two
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 5-0 against the granting of the
Variance to allow division on one lot into two lots.
Additionally, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 5-0 to grant the variance to
allow the existing deck, subject to the following conditions:
1 . The deck remain in its present form as provided on
the plans submitted to this Board. �• .
DENIED VARIANCE TO DIVIDE
GRANTED VARIANCE TO ALLOW DECK
Richard A. Bencal, Secretary
s ' r
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 THE MASS.
GENERAL LAPS. CHAFFER S".. A:2D 1H.'.LL G_ FLED :':'Ii 1:( ZO DAYS AFT EF. THE DATE Of FICINS
OF THIS DECISb M: I'� THL Ci"CE ;�` THE CIT: CLERK. .
�
;( ' . C- P:,_ L� CHA°TEE S", SEC I :.' 11. THE \ OP. �Pf�l. FE''••:IT
PCRSA,i rp.P �� IH' - 'M :RT-
LF(A IEJ HEREII. SH:11- I l''T T,'.E Ef"E(T U 'i L A F F.-„_
fl�ATION CF THE U.Y NERC 1 'D D41° L „t - • _. . - i, IS
GR THAT. IF SUCH AN APPS',! H;3 BE:': FI E Th-` If jaf—!E OF Tri- '1-
RECORDED
RECORDED IN THE SOJTH ESSEX REGISTRY OF DELCS k;;D
OF RECORD OR IS RECORDED AND NOTED ON TKE O-:.NER S CERTIFIC.AfE OF TITLE.
BOARD OF APPEAL
A TRUE COPY ATTEST
July 17, 1987
q4sepVne R. Fusco
CITY CLERK
SALEM, MASS.
r D z -i c-
m D -i �' z =
N r Sp N D O
m m OD C7
r
D S 07° 28 ' 49 " W --e- m
v 60.00' w cn 49.42' 105. 00 D
N r ` O OD
OZ Z
O _ r
3 � D
wo w O ~ o z Oz �
o : - �' 60.0 0 o z (D N z z m
o S 07° 28'49 " W —� I m ~ m m
o OD 9 RIGHT OF WAY I 5i a _ - m
8 SPACE�;�SA4CE BI ;SPACE C1 _ — N� —n p L
m — 20 - 20 - 20c0 O D
\ :o 105 .00
69.00 ' � 0 41. 07 ' I z
N 07° 58 ' 30" E a N 07° 58 ' 30" E +I m
ao
o o Z
o .
o W C
co
m m m o
_ m
r
m D
--•� D G-) p 301330 SXd310 m
z D m SSV 'HIvs 30 A110 �—
w r D m £6, kid OZ Z Il d3S r `°
_ r z o r
o z cn z
-i . c- n
APPEAL CASE NO. .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
v �Varb of Vd SEP 2i 2 is '93
TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS CITY OF SALEM. MASS
CLEWS Of `ICE
The Undersigned represent that he is are the owners of a certain parcel of land located
at NO. . . . . 1„} Meadow , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , • • . . . _ . . . . .Street; Zoning District.B.4 . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : and said parcel is affected by Section(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
of the Massachusetts State Building Code.
Plans describing the work proposed, have been submitted to the Inspector of Buildings in
accordance with Section IX A. 1 of the Zoning Ordinance.
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:
The Petitioner proposes to subdivide the existing lot with two buildings on it into
two lots, each with a building on it: one a single family, and the other a multi-family.
The existing lot is non-conforming with respect to certain dimensional requirements.
The new lots would therefore retain those non-conformities, would increase the existing non
conformity regarding lot area, and would result in creating an additional non-conformity
relating to the side yard and rear yard setback (Lot B) , even though no new structures
would be added, since the lot line dividing the two lots would create a non-conformity.
However the existing non-conformity relating to the ordinance's prohibition on two princi-
pal buildings on one lot would be cured. The petitioner requests that the board grant
him the required special permit relating to increasing the lot area non-conformity; grant
him the variance from side-yead setback, and grant such other relief which would permit the
proposed subdivision. The existing ownership situation creates a hardship in that the
property is not marketable and that it is unique among the lots within the district. Re-
lief granted would be consistent with Owner. .H. Drew Romanovitz
the intent of the zoning ordingance. Richard W. Staffotd, Esq. • . • . . • .
Address PIP.Tintir, Quinn & Savoy_. P.C.
222 Essex Street, Salem, Mass.
Telephone. W-8817, , , • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Petitioner.owner
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Address. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
DS�gtember 21 , 1993
Teleph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
By. . . . . . . . .� Y. . . � . . . .
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. . . . o . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . .
four weeks prior to the meeting of the Board of Appeals. Check payable to The
Evening News.
No....................................
PETITION TO BOARD OF APPEALS
LOCATION
................................................................
PETITIONER..........................................
ADDRESS...............................................
.............................................
CONDII IONS
...........................-....................................
........................ .......................................
................................................................
.................................................................
................................................................
.................................................................
PETITION APPROVED.................... ❑
DENIED......................... 0
...................................................1 19.........
l- < <
OCEAN AVENUE
N 820 09 ' 00" W
ROBERT J. Le BLANC,
JOSHUA a CLAIRE L . DESCH[
ATE f N o 0
D OF 1928 o LAWRENCE J. o
a NANCY E .
MOO N EY
O f'R N
N 820 09' 00" W M>
—� M> �a
58. 94 ' w
} LOT A ti �
3,927±SF O m
3 a o + GEORGE T. , IIL
I
o) NO. 13 /2 ; r- SUSAN M .
O
IN T . & � z GALLANT
N l0 . 00_.
SARA L. co PLAN 431 OF IE
r�
S 81 30' 00" E S 810 30' 00 E
L L 0 30.00' 1V--
— 9
- , W-
w
0 y o f g ,_ o
O >- Cf) O
M
coo 3 a _ g' � -
to co
vrn m
it u-
LOT B , 0
OD
o= 9 , // O
I, 800+
N 1
ti(D 9 Z
N0. 13 � R i
�i rn a
' TO HAZEL ST. 30.00 ' .:. .. 18.00' , ;
S 810 30' 00 " E
M E A D O W S TR E E T
ut�`C�iT ' S "
(QitU of ,"�Mlem, Aussar1juse##s'° Ju 30 8 so M 181
9A itLE11}
nxrb of enl
'" CITY CLERK.SALEM.MASS.
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF H. DREW ROMANOVITZ FOR A VARIANCE
AT 131 MEADOW ST. (B-4)
A hearing on this petition was held June 17, 1967 with the following Board Members
present: James Hacker, Chairman; Richard Bencal, Secretary; Messrs. , Fleming,
Luzinski and Associate Member Labrecque. Notice of the hiaring was sent to abutter
and others and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem
' Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A.
li
Petitioner is requesting a Variance from any and all applicable density and rear
and side setback requirements to allow one parcel of land to be divided into two
nonconforming lots. Additionally, petitioner is requesting a second variance
to allow an existing deck which encroaches on rear and sideline requirements.
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 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 district or the purpose of the Ordinance.
The Board of Appeal, after hearing the evidence presented at the hearing, makes
the following findings of fact:
1 . The condition of the two buildings on one lot has existed
for many years;
i
2. The deck was constructed prior to the purchase by the petitioner;
3. The deck is used also as a means of egress.
i
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 . In regards to the division of the lot, petitioner failed
to establish hardship;
2. In regards to the deck:
'i
a. desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to
j
the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating
from the intent of the district of the purpose of the Ordinance;
b. Literal enforcement of the Ordinance would involve substantial
hardship to the petitioner.
i
ii
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF H. DREW ROMANOVITZ FOR VARIANCES
AT 131 MEADOW ST. , SALEM
page two
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 5-0 against the granting of the
Variance to allow division on one lot into two lots.
Additionally, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 5-0 to grant the..variance;to
allow the existing deck, subject to the following conditions:. ..
1 . The deck remain in its present form as provided on,
the plans submitted to this Board. 1 41.
DENIED VARIANCE TO DIVIDE t
GRANTED VARIANCE TO ALLOW DECK /
Richard A. Bencal, Secretary
r
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 SE71ON 17 OF THE MIA.SS.
GENERAL LAWS. CHAPTER 5".,i. A:':� SHALL DE NL:D ::.'`i It( ?G OS1S AFiEY. THE DATE OF FILING
THF CIT: CLER6.
OF THIS DECISICi: I:. THE -A.. .. -
rA �.HA°'Ei: VS SEC I .' 11. THE 1 v ° PP. SPEC"' FE"':1T -
PUPSA`i r i.,BSc cc rF - rP 'RT-
GF, IEO HERE11 SIi1-, (i:`T P_E EFFE(l U''i L A Cr.7 �i TIt- ` F F!--7D.
fIGNTIvN
CF THE Ll-,Y CLLR, ZO CAI 1. C.'
CR THAT. IF SUCH AN APPFA! H4S BE:'. FIE TH:T I(
RECORDED IN THE SOUTH ESSE> RE.ASTRY OF UEECS A ICU >E' U n. LL•.E OF TriE _
OF RECORD OR IS RECORDED AND NOTED ON THE OwNER'S CERTIFIC.TE Or TITLE.
BOARD OF APPEAL
A TRUE COPY ATTEST
July 17, 1987
se$ ne R. Fusco
CITY CLERK
SALEM. MASS.
OCEAN AVENUE
N 820 09 ' 00" W
ROBERT J. Le BLANC,
JOSHUA a CLAIRE L . DESCH[
>TEIN o 0
D of 1928 o LAWRENCE J. o
& NANCY E . _
MOO N EY
x N
r
T
N 820 09' 00" W nS
m z>
58. 94 ' w w
¢ LOT tiM
3,927±SF o OD
3 a , o GEORGE T. , III
I
0, N0. 13 /2 ; 0 SUSAN M .
►N T . 8s z GALLANT
N 10 . 00.:
SARA L. ti �I PLAN 431 OF Ic,
S 81 30 00 E S g 1 ' 30 00 E
L L o 30.00' —— - 9
U w
- w-
o i O + go - o
coo 3 Q 9' o-
co = 3 ------ rn o0
LOTB0L °
U
I9800+ o= o
9
N0. 13 o� Q z
r cn- QR i
r �
TO HAZEL ST. 30.00 ' .. 18.00' ,
S 810 30' 00 " E
M E A D O W S TR E E T
Cc_
git of !$ttlem, �Nttssnrjrasgtts , 30 8 sc IM '07
$ �1 FILE#
ZZ s ourb of ` "vd CIiY CLERK.SALEM.MASS.
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF H. DREW ROMANOVITZ FOR A VARIANCE
AT 1371 MEADOW ST. (B-4)
A hearing on this petition was held June 17, 1987 with the .following Board Members
present: James Hacker, Chairman; Richard Bencal, Secretary; Messrs. , Fleming,
Luzinski and Associate Member Labrecque. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutter
and others and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem
Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A.
Petitioner is requesting a Variance from any and all applicable density,and rear
and side setback requirements to allow one parcel of land to be divided into two
nonconforming lots. Additionally, petitioner is requesting a second .variance
to allow an existing deck which encroaches on rear and sideline requirements.
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 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 district or the purpose of the Ordinance.
The Board of Appeal, after hearing the evidence presented at the hearing, makes
the following findings of fact:
1 . The condition of the two buildings on one lot has existed
for many years;
2. The deck was constructed prior to the purchase by the petitioner;
3. The deck is used also as a means of egress.
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 . In regards to the division of the lot, petitioner failed
to establish hardship;
2. In regards to the deck:
i
a. desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to
j the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating
from the intent of the district of the purpose of the Ordinance;
b. Literal enforcement of the Ordinance would involve substantial
,j hardship to the petitioner.
i
c�
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF H. DREW ROMANOVITZ FOR VARIANCES
AT 131 MEADOW ST. , SALEM
page two
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 5-0 against the granting of the
Variance to allow division on one lot into two lots.
Additionally, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 5-0 to grant the variance to
allow the existing deck, subject to the following conditions:
1 . The deck remain in its present form as provided on.
the plans submitted to this Board. t. ,
DENIED VARIANCE TO DIVIDE 1
GRANTED VARIANCE TO ALLOW DECK / !.
Richard A. Bencal, Secretary
fq
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK
APPEAL FROM THIS DfiCIS:DN. IF ANY, SHALL BE "ADZ PURSUANT TO SECTION 17 OF THE MASS.
GENERAL LAPIS, UHAVER 8"— A-'7 SH%dL CE F+-i'` 20 DA)S Ai TEP, THE DATE OF FILING -
C
` ::,E F THE CIT; CLERS.
OF THIS DECISI. I HE
'E S:CSI . ' 11. T4E OPCPf'I. FC^.
:1T
.HA° .RLPLRSANf T;nCdEliSh l Ni': EF"i<1 GI L A r[:P1 OF TH
fIGATICN IF THE LIS CUR, IHS 20 CAI° L - r ;I Gn -'.:MIS -
GR THAT. IF SUCH AN APPiAI HIS BEC: fUE. TH IG is L' THE '.. .
REGORGED IN THE SOUTH ESSEX RE:ICTRY GF GEECS Aq. IS iIFi'_l]
Of
OF RECORD OR IS RECORDED AND NOTED ON THE O;lNER'S CERTIFICATE Or TITLE.
BOARD OF APPEAL
A TRUE COPY ATTEST
July 17, 1987___ )
sep ne R. Fusco
CITY CLERK
SALEM, MASS.
77
IBOARIVOF .........
2
3
4
FAtaf3
..I...... ...I.......... 5
DATE 09/29/93 a
0 ° CERTIFIED ABUTTERS LIST 7 0
a
7
9
L T-1,0( ( Fi
26 o........
..
_T �T,
.... ..... .. ....
HEA 6c)jj,8 IRE
................ .......
......... 12
10 13
0 1 1 :4 •
5
12 16
,N4*P OT 21IFF NATI ING ADDRE
13 .......... ",
.........
14 ... I. .....
MA�NQVITZ'I ............
15
R ,bRFwI .............
0,66 0 MtA 66W 87Atg7.........
...........
17 33 0080 202 0013 MEADOW STREET 1112 ROMANOVITZ H DREW 25 LYNDE ST 220
SALEM MA 01970 23
10 24
I'll"79
......................
'VTRGlNIAv R 91'
260
28
20 ......
X 27
REAL. ......
I I'll 11 1, pl�
21 .....
ll)'�Do AUDI- .................
............... "e. I�, � I " , I �_, 28
22 29
0 23 33 0066 0090 OCEAN AVENUE ROMANOVITZ K'EITH R/ROMANOV17Z RITA 90 OCEAN AVE 300
MOONEY KATHELLEN M SALEM MA 01970 31
24 J� T 4f qVi i A AA OCEAN AVF 32
0947-, ......
25 ...........
........... ......... .....
26:.':....... ...
z. ........ ,J�4,` NOW ......I,....�I,;
00x0. 5
. ...........
27: ......... p
...............
2837
0 29 33 0078 0009 MEADOW STREET )"JORENO JOSE 9 112 MEADOW ST 3s.
MORENO MILADY SALEM MA 01970 39
30 STR E.1 SHAWP.AljGw IZIARCIJ r) 1 11 11PAT)OW C;T 40
31 "7'T ........ 41
........... ......
.............. 42•
.32 ..........I'�GUT,'IE,.-R,gEZ%-GAE-k.ICL�-��:�'�:%�]%"�%,��,%�:"'I
W I'S,
33, ........
44
34 T
0 35 33 0082 0017 MEADOW STREET COTE EDWARD E 8 CHARLOTTE ST 46s
0
COTE MARY T SALEM MA 01970 47
36 pl.."RKIN2 WART-1-14 P 481
TRE IlF-A I _4
37
-7 11'11�..............%,'�_.,',1�11!',........ ........
N s,
SAI".Cft, 0
0 :
.............. ........
2,%115,�
3
CAMP, BELIL I , -
111-111,11 .1-11 1 ll� I EA D 0 1 ST,
3 52
.........c.q . .........
4053
-7-7 0089 0010 MEADOW STREET MARGOLIN FAITH A 4LLE
.0 AN FARM LANE 54 0
41
CONCORD MA 0-1742 5
42 56
....... .....
43 57
...........
•
......... .......... I.
11112*11
........ .. I.
..........I,
45
60
46 iF,
4047 :2 40
3
48 64
6
0 •
6 1
.. ...........
%
..........
Iyyl"
52 69
0 53 'o
71 0,
54 72
55 ....... 73
5: 74•
75
P.E*.T ER M. CARoN C.7" "Oc
:, -, a v 33
z, zj0 5° C)7i � ug7G
00 N D,q rig'
98 Cli
3200 3
'Y6-$ 101 317
- 5.2.50 5250 96'- °'� 19075
2 102 a ��so gg Y050 m„ . gsoo
5 1 m°
5 52 ❑
8 3 0 .
D3J F 10 5r25 ��9 m� 332
w 93,935 5A30 L1600- w 318 0x56
1 m w
Io 5,500
n 86 f1 89 91 92 g40 x 330 3
88 1 ✓ 190 v 319 �. s3/2
7975 7eT5 sOi550 5,20 e
x 7 5930 w 3Zi
n,ry N
x. " T.
,5h � 4.a s 77 � 9 m
p59 �* so a 36 32
—S 10 9 7 5V
jp0 ,a 1,M'E /,',p y0 W,y s•.a'/' T' 50 4o so i4e n 321 .6.
s s s7 C 3648 f5
6 .,pO X 3,,., 322 3c .;
n ,
62 O a
-5 se 5 73 �,u
// 8. r7 76 7 a 2500
� b
8593 I ~ v o�,80�
3.524 AC N �// ✓ 5 05 t 9 s 00 5f.00 5,.50 Q200 3x03 " 500 e
4;sco 72"1 s
84 82 el 8 / o rT— _ 324 °
- �'3eii3 4, 31 g..:00
L r' V 32" 3r p
/X66 67 68 69 L�11 71 N m 51�5U SLAC 8 30 +CU
5 0 - V. 70 ► 1 3.092 �4s so fin sz
64 65 5600 /05p0 IIJI E A S
/,5705708 52500 so 7a s*
6� 45 ..5250° 'S0 5 50 o ez'/z;sz so V E s �� 6aso so y� 49 I r
° AV N ❑
N . I
BS''i'- 65 50 60 w Z I
OCEAN 99 so
3z6"S v ov y...,e
IF. ° 50 ° s° 52 50 8,3,'( "' m
EAST a,.:e :c 47 so a 51 5,'i a' Z
- AVENUE sa 00 5;660 pi
QCEAN as 58 5800 55 5;700530 4'' 48 � o
163 4 90:' 57 4,960 54 m
4,900. 44 45 4,4 C
oo-s 62 61 60 4 9 ❑ 4H 47 m
4.6$3 43 5,ri80 .9353 a0 4.2/0
41
3 42 m 38 3900 4,0 0 4,00 42✓J 4/00 4 9,0 s0 e s S T4
,O 3 SB
406 - a 3D ,z
37 so ,4 . .,'�z so s 25
O1 m 9,405 9,600 4,90 5° a Is i3 50
n.�' / 26
p N IOOcS
too
0H E 8 s E17Y 16 I"o 50 50 50 i64G 74H
>nN nI1JJ L 7s�C 2850
ISO 3 31 29
2qT9
a:24
'so 4, 003
34 , 0 900
4, pD4 90
Z 234 430 Q oa 18 19
57 .:,900 O0
r-n
to
_
ASSESSORS- MAP 33 PARCEL 80
• tocUs �
c
APPROVAL UNDER SUBDIVISION
CONTROL LAW NOT REQUIRED
LOC U S MAP
SALEM PLANNING BOARD
OCEAN A V E N U E
N 820 09 ' 00" W
ROBERT J. Le BLANC, Jr. CHAIRMAN DATE
rn N / F JOSHUA 8. CLAIRE L . DESCHENES
EPSTEIN 0 00
J PLAN so of 1928 o LAWRENCE J. 0
— a NANCY E . `
MOO N EY
N 820 09' 00" W
6, 58. 947. i
LOT A e= t .
,.
2 3,927±S � o 0o
3 a I -0- o GEORGE T. , 311 a
N0. 13 /2 ; o SUSAN M .
BURTON T . &
10 ,00' Z GALLANT L11
ui
BARBARA L. C\j° s 81° 3o oo" E PLAN 431 OF 1941
S 81 ° 30'00 E ccBALL o 30.00' 7, I u9 w
O IUR M
'o
0 0 �a 9'
m c
LOT 8 =j NTN o
i I,800} 2_ = N
ti C7 9, Z
NO. 13
OE
W- Q
uR V
348 ' TO HAZEL ST. ' 1m8.1a
30.0000' ,,,
S 810 30' 00 " E
SUBDIVISION
. PLAN OF LAND
' LOCATED IN
MEADOW STRE ET
SALEM , MASS.
S
PREPARED BY
EASTERN LAND SURVEY ASSOCIATES, INC.
FOR REGISTRY USE ONLY CHRISTOPHER R. MELLO P. L.S.
40 LOWELL ST. PEABODY, MASS.
N't
Owner : HDREW CHRISTOPHER,{R[, Record O . I HEREBY CERTIFY THIS PLAN CONFORMS TO THE g2H RHER, � �' SCALE : 1 �� = 20 ' " FEBRUARY - 19, . 1987
( H PREPARED FOR
RRFF ROMANOVITZ RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE REGISTERS OF �: o E��or -� - REV. OCT. 181993
DEEDS OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS. " �F .33V �
N .S�R�`o� H . DREW ROMANO V I TZ
GE RGE DEE III DESIGNER 10 `W 20 �4 40 6f) so
F7307