25 BEACH AVENUE - PICONE, JAMES & KATHLEEN - ZBA (2) 25 Beach Ave. R-1
James & Kathleen Picone
V
1
a
Tit" o �`�lrm, ?ffisgadluscits
I
i $3nttr0 ut _attpettl JUL Z J 57 ' I '9I
CITY ;.Cc
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF JAMES & KATHLEEN PICONE FOR
VARIANCES AT 25 BEACH AVE. (2-1 )
A hearing on this petition was held June 20, 1991 with the following Board Members
present: Richard Bencal, Chairman; Richard Febonio, Edward Luzinski, Mary Jane
Stirgwolt and Associate Member Ronald Plante. 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.
Petitioner, owner of the property,is requesting Variances from any and all density
regulations in order to allow division of property in this R-1 zone.
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 involve
substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner.
c. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public
goo good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the
district or the purpose of the Ordinance.
a
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 . No opposition was submitted.
2. The request for relief is required in order to resolve title defects affecting
the parcel.
3. The shape of the deeded parcel is substantially different from the shape of
the occupied parcel.
4. The parcel has been occupied by the existing structure for residential use
since the turn of the century.
5. Granting relief will not vary the existing use and structure.
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 to the petitioners.
4
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF JAMES & KATHLEEN PICONE FOR VARIANCES
AT 25 BEACH AVENUE, SALEM
page two
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.
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 5-0, to grant the
Variances requested, subject to the following conditions:
1 . Division of the property is to be done as per plans and dimensions submitted.
2. Petitioner obtain approval from any other City Boards and/or Commission which
may have jurisdiction.
3. The seawall abutting the property be maintained in perpetuity by the
property owner.
Variances Granted
June 26, 1991
R'i'chard A.Bencal, Chairman
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 Sectlorl 17 Ot
the Mass. General Laws, Chapter 808, and shall be filed within 20 days
after the date:of tiling of this decision in the office of the City Clerk.
i` v,unnt to Mass. Goaeral Lae,% Ch-❑'e: 203, Section 11, lha v mance
nr ?;ur.i al Perrn!t nr::nm.l herein vof tike effect until a copy of tho
,!e:lsinn, t, ;mnq the certification of the Cily Clerk that 20 days have
c!zpcad and no appeal han been filed, or that, if such appeal has been
filed, that it has been dismissed or denied is recorded in the South Essex
R,gistry of Deeds and indexed under the name or the owner of record or
is recorded and noteu !n the owner's Certificate of Title.
r— ut ' BOARD OF APPEAL
a
�f Cn