24-28 SOUTH STREET - ZBA llll ® 3
UPC 10333 y �a
No.153L-3 bnm
HASTINGS, MH
i
I�
I,
e
Legal Notict�i.s v!
•� 1
CITY OF SALEM
BOARD OF APPEAL
+ 745.9595,Ext.381 li
Will hold a public hearing for all
persons interested in the petition sub-
mitted by Paul Dibiase, Trustee
requesting dimensional Variances
for lot area and front yard setbacks to
create 2lots for the property located at
24-28 South Street R-1.Said hearing '
to be held Wednesday, Marchl2,1,
2001 at 6:30 P.M.,One Salern Green,
2nd Floor. 1 .1�J
f 97P en
ai an
(3/7,14) �" ;i?r'17CtdJi 81
T a L< <
L_
i
Citp of *aiem, fRazzacbmew
CITY OF SALEM, MA
Jgoarb of Zfppeal CLERK'S OFFICE
2001 MAR 21 P 2: 52
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF PAUL DIBIASE, TRUSTEE REQUESTING A
VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 24-28 SOUTH STREET R-1
A hearing on this petition was held on March 21, 2001, with the following Board
Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Stephen Buczko, Stephen Harris, James
Hacker and Richard Dionne. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and other and
notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening News in
accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A.
The petitioner is requesting dimensional Variances for lot area and front yard setbacks to
create 2 lot for the property located at 24-28 South Street located in an R-1 zone.
The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding of the Board
that:
a. Special conditions and circumstances exit 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
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 of the evidence presented at the
hearing and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact:
1. Ledgewood Hill Realty Trust, Paul DiBiase, Trustee is the owner of a lot on South
Street of approximately 23, 400 s.f. Thomas Beatrice, Esq. of 286 Humphrey Street,
Swampscott, represented Mr. DiBiase at the hearing.
2. In 1996, a previous owner of this lot applies for variances in lot size and frontage to
build three single-family homes. This Board denied the earlier petition on November
13, 1996.
3. In his petition, Mr. DiBiase requested variances in lot size and front setback
requirements to build two single-family homes. He resented the Board a "Drainage
Report" prepared by Parsons and FAIA, Inc. of Lynn, Ma. In support of the petition,
purporting to show that the construction of two homes could be done in a manner
that would decrease rainwater runoff to the rear of the property by increasing flow to
a South Street storm drain.
Y
1
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF PAUL DIBIASE, TRUSTEE REQUESTING A
VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 24-28 SOUTH STREET R-1
pagetwo
4. Five neighbors opposed the petition. These were: Mr. Rob Dennehy of 29 Crescent
Dr., Mr. Robert Vacirca of 27 Crescent Dr., Mr. John Connors of 40 Nichols St, Mr.
Paul Butler Jr., of 32 Albion St and Mr. Bill Muse of 31 Crescent Dr. The neighbors
argued that the development would necessitate building an unsightly retaining wall at
the foot of the slope, that the drainage could create water runoff issues for those
down hill of the development, and that the petitioner had failed to show the elements
of hardship related to the land that are needed to grant a variance from the
ordinance's requirements.
5. Mr. Beatrice argued that the proposed development was consistent with the
surrounding lots in size and setback configuration, and that the new homes would be
an asset to the neighborhood.
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 do not exist which especially affect the subject property and not
the district in general.
2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would not result in
unnecessary hardship to the petitioner.
3. The relief requested cannot be granted without substantial detriment to the public
good or without nullifying and substantially hardship derogating from the intent of the
district or purpose of the Ordinance.
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 0 in favor and 5 in opposition to grant the
requested variances. Having failed to garner the four affirmative votes required to pass,
the motion is defeated and the petition is denied.
VARIANCE DENIED
March 21, 2001
Nina Cohen, Chairman
Board of Appeal
t
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF PAUL DIBIASE, TRUSTEE REQUESTING A
VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 24-28 SOUTH STREET R-1
page three
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 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 passed 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