4 LOONEY AVENUE - BUILDING INSPECTION • , } l� { y`�it ih�.�•t�ry�M1ww;_
• 4 LOONEY AVENUE
is
of 5atm,
Puaru trf APPg�z1
°81 APP -2 A8 :53 MARCH 18, 1981
CITY C!_ERK'C OFFICE
DECISION ON 177 ,:ETf'T 0i OF ROBERT FOUHEY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR 4 LOONEY
AVENUE
A hearing on this Petition was held on March 18, 1981 with the following
Board Members present: Douglas Hopper, Chairman; Messrs. Piemonte, Hacker. ,
and Associate Member Luzinski. Notices of the hearing were sent to abutters
and others and a notice of the hearing was published in the Salem Evening News
on March 4, 1981, and March 11, 1981 in accordance with Massachusetts General
Laws, Chapter 40A.
The Petitioner has requested a variance for the property at 4 Looney
Avenue to construct a porch eight feet by eighteen feet. A variance is required
because the proposed construction would reduce the rear yard at the site to
less than the minimum requirement of thirty feet,
The Board of Appeals, after consideration of the evidence presented at
the public hearing and after viewing the property makes the following findings
of fact:
1. The property in question is unique because of its size and configuration
and because of the location of existing structure on the site.
2. The proposed construction is unopposed by abutters.
On the basis of the above findings of fact, and the evidence presented at
the public hearing, the Board of Appeals concludes as follows:
(1) The property in question is unique because of its peculiar configuration
and because of the location of the existing structure on the lot.
(2) The conditions described above especially affect the land and zoning
district in which the property is located,
(3) The conditions described above which affect the land in question, but
not the zoning district generally cause the following special hardshi.p: .
without the grant of a variance the property cannot be improved in
. the manner -w-hich is most appropriate to the existing structure and to
the surrounding neighborhood.
(4) The desired variance may be granted without substantial detriment to
the public good because the. proposed construction will improve the
appearance of the neighborhood.
af
U.—.—:� ♦ti CC.� ourb of l
\4m! .—
'81 APR -2 A 8 :5
DECISION - NARCH -.,FQB . OUHEY - PAGE U40
TY'
8X
SALEM hle ' .,
Therefore, the Board of Zoning Appeals unanimously voted in favor of
granting the requested relief. The Board grants a variance to the petitioner
on the following terms and conditions:
1. A variance is granted to allow the proposed addition to encroach
to within 23 feet of the rear property line,
2. All construction shall be in accordance with the plans submitted
to the Board.
O c
Douglas✓$opper, Chai,f,;ian
p5'PE2A e—.,.Z' 1 THIS .SHALL GE !:IADE PVSU.4NT TO SECTION 17 OF THE MASS.
GENERAL U'ViS, C - £s 1 J I,LL ' '. ; ni
GF THIS B-'S�^r -;I,E cO DA"S AFTE;r THE DATE OF FILING -
C
G;-( C
ptipsAxT-e
CM141EB Y . c ct 1 THE if !1 :Cf CR ?ECTAL PEJUMT
-� I U 'i
fE I_v' 'rG THE CERT-.
3GAT':OR OF TH U : m'R rA f
aR TNA?. IF SUCH 7'r AfPci _ ._'. -- � NO 'E-AL HAS F-_8. Ft LE D,
i
IN Tri' S'�UTH ESS n r ��i? :ID J ,� _O Ci t'.'1,CD IS
:i 8EU.iD:OR IS ficCORDEO ADD :,JIED' 'I IHE Or70ERS CEPTiFICAfE OF TITLErXAE OF THE 010JfIER
DOARQ OF APPEAL
''.'.A COPY OF THIS DECISION AND PLANS HAS BEEN FILED WITH TIE PLANNING BOARD ANll THE CITY CLERK.