23 BRADFORD STREET - KENNY, MARION - ZBA 23 Bradford St. (R-2)
James Poppe (Petitioner)
Marion Kenny (Owner)
Y
� T.J
I
i
`JY:c eg�r„
C�iig of
A
,IR_
�� V.. �utzr� of cr���e�zl
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF JAMES W. POPPE (PETITIONER)
I L PERMIT FOR 23 BRADFORD ST. L.FM
MARION C. KENNY (OWNER) FOR SPECIAL 'SA
A ,-
A
A hearing on this petition was held May 23, 1984 with the following Board [Members
present: James Hacker, Chairman; Messrs. , Charnas, Gauthier, Luzinski and Strout_
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 requests a Special Permit to alter his non-conforming property by
changing the frontage from97.8 feet to 83.8 feet and changing the lot size from
L] - 7507�Csq. ft. to 6692+ sq. ft.
e provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to this request
for Special Permit is Section V B 10, which provides as follows:
= = z
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing
in this Ordinance, the Board of Appeal may, in
. accordance with the procedure and conditions set - ,
forth in Section VIII F and IX D grant S ecial Permits
Sp
5 ` ` for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming
` J
_ " � - <_ � � structures, and for changes, enlargement, extension or
expansion of nonconforming lots,land, structures,
and used, provided,however, that such change, extension,
= enlarsement or expansion shall not be substantially more
detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to the
_ - J neighborhood.
- - 4
more general terms, this Board is, when reviewing Special Permit requests,
- - ��pided by the rule that a Special Permit may be granted upon a finding
the Board that the grant of the Special Permit will promote the publc health,
•l =
-Safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants.
L^
-
- ane Board of Appeal, after consideration of the evidence presented at the. hearing
= = = sd after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact:
G c _ - _ _ p
1 . The changes contemplated by the petitioner will not affect
the neighborhood in any substantial way;
2. No opposition to the plan was raised by neighbors.
Based uoon the above findings of fact and on the evidence presented at the hearing,
the Board of Appeals concludes as follows:
1 . The relief requested does not create a substantial detriment to the
public good, nor does it substantiall derogate from or nullify the
intent or purpose of the Zoning Ordinance.
Therefore, the Board of Appeal voted unanimously to grant the relief requested.
Scott E. Charnas, secretary
A COP''OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILE WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK
d�
r137°/l :40 �\
so
S
/ C'E.eT/F�Y T"A T 7-14/0 OZ-AN
lYAS A2EPA /ZED /N ACCO/Z,OANCE
� TNo,tlA .SO
2. iY/ru T�-/E 2uLEs A-/,�o
CA UP6ELL R�CjIJLq T/aNS02= Tf-/�
2EC/ST2S O Oe=-L=-OS"
N o
N N/CL1OLAO 0.
N CqR/s TY
L .C. PL4N 2/464A)
NEdL � /
M/ TCNELL, J/Z. �
5B 50 NOTE
' PA/ZCEL ":4 � TO OL- COMB/NEO
ALBA NO
QUAD20S POPPY ATO F02ti1✓ON�SLOT
Dr/ELL/h/G COAI[l/N/NC 4/62 7
o _ 27
� L1Po20✓AL UN0�2 �C/f,3-
✓AMEs 1^/ Ft�PPE O D/vi0/ON COh/T/ZOL I-Arl
cp 04� ( NOT 2�Qu/2ED.
-s
oto/^iA2D 2. �� C7A2 . HW2 'SB '30' 1� DATA
/^/A 7-T- 57. 42 h
`�RC�� ;4•� o �
G'OR.2ET/�✓GLL. �
7, 13
J.4N/CE A. N� SQLf I PLANN/N� �A20
� QUAD205 P�}RG�L- •f3 "• O
� Dl'yELL /NC7
ANCus A.
MUN2o�
PLAN OF LAND /N
8oa� 34LEM, ti1A .
�'¢2 'S5D7 "� P/?EPAR�D F02
PETE2 ! Y
C�1ERKL L. POPPE"
AlELEN SAXON/5 "AY 3, /9B4
D2/N,0Y,4TE2
T�iM. SNC/NEE2/NG ,�1S.�'�C/�IT�s, /NC.
22 /N/LLON/ AV. - 54LE1✓l,"-4 . o/n7o
Loc ,yo L
u6�
, 1117',
. G
WCU,5 MAP
5CALZ--
/2�9