20 FRANCIS ROAD - PIZZO, ANTHONY - ZBA 1
20 Francis Road R-1
Anthony Pizzo
--75'
9�
-2
i
(glig of �Iertt, � ttsstttl�use#ts
nttrb of upral N '� Z 3 0: P�; 1F.1
'L..mi.
FAL!. ..
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF ANTHONY PIZZO FOR A VARIANCE cjT•, LKnS
FOR 20 FRANCIS ROAD I
y A hearing on this petition was held November 12, 1986 with the following Board
; emlFers present: James Hacker, Chairman; Messrs. , Bencal, Fleming, Luzinski and
; r l Strut. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and others and notices of the
- j w 'hearang were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with
_ =% Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A.
_ Cl -
-
T etitioner, owner of the property, is requesting a Variance from density and
- ,zetback requirements to allow construction of a stairway and deck in this R-1 zone.
he Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding of the Board
u.
LIJ that:
.,
' � : a. special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect
_ Is � w
the land, building or structure involved and which are not generally
affecting other lands, buildings and structures in the same district;
w o b. literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve
substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner; and
_ 3
c. desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the
,;6 - public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the
a o intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance.
4 - •I � ,J
=The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented; and
- x -after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact:
1 . No opposition or support was voiced at the meeting;
i
2. The stairs and deck are needed for egress purposes.
On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented, the
Board of Appeal concludes as follows:
1 . Special conditions exist which affect subject property but do not
affect the district generally;
2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Ordinance would involve
substantial hardship to the petitioner;
3. The relief requested can be granted without substantial detriment to the
public good and without substantially derogating from the intent of .the
district or the purpose of the Ordinance.
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 5-0, to allow sideyard
setback of seven (7) feet on the easterly side and to allow existing deck as per
plans on file.
GRANTED
Peter Strout, Member, Board of Appeal
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK
BAY STATE SURVEYING SERVICE INC.
234 CABOT ST , BEVERLY, MA.
LOCATION TO
................................ .............. ---
--- oll -;-. � �, - and that iiie
SCALE FT DATE ........ I hereby carfify that I �oee examined the prern ses cn d t
REFERENCE building (s) shown on this plon or-- lace ed on the ground as
shown an,' that they conformed to the zoning setblc,l(s of th,�-
------------ when constructed
----------------
NOTE a This is a 100mca- nsDection z�rvey ano not II The bujldina (s) are not located ir, t1he special flood h-Ozc"d
an irl sjrv,-y,, ihrefO,re this plat plan is for zone as defined by H.U.D
mortgage inspection es only,
purees -- - ----
-
L A FS
I II
A R F
-j F-
10
f0"
7
rt-PA AJ C 1 S T ` F/