Zoning Board of Appeals

City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes August 21, 2024 A meeting of the Salem Zoning Board of Appeals (“Salem ZBA”) was held on Wednesday, August 21, 2024 at 6:30 pm via remote participation in accordance with Chapter 2 of the Act of 2023 and a Special Act extending remote participation meetings. Chair Nina Vyedin calls the meeting to order at 6:30 pm. Chair Vyedin explains how individuals can participate in the meeting remotely via Zoom, and that instructions to participate remotely can also be found on the Salem website. Ms. Vyedin also explains the rules regarding public comment. ROLL CALL Those present were: Nina Vyedin, Carly McClain, Paul Viccica, Ellen Simpson, and Stephen Larrick. Also in attendance were Daniel Laroe – Staff Planner, Voula Orfanos — Acting Zoning Officer, and Jonathan Pinto – Recording Clerk. Those absent were: Hannah Osthoff CONTINUANCES Location: 11 March Street (Map 36, Lot 176) (R2 Zoning District) Applicant: Johane Jean-Baptiste Project: A continuation of a public hearing for all persons interested in the petition of JOHANE JEAN-BAPTISTE at 11 MARCH STREET (Map 36, Lot 176) (R2 Zoning District) for a Special Permit per Section 3.3.5 Nonconforming Singleand Two-family Structures of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to expand an existing nonconforming structure with a 192 square foot, one story addition. The addition proposes a 1.8’ front yard setback where a 15’ front yard setback is required. A 3.4’ side yard setback and a 25’ rear yard setback. In the R2 District, 10 feet is required for a side yard setback and 30 feet is required for the rear yard setback. Documents and Exhibitions  Application date-stamped May 17, 2024 and supporting documentation Chair Vyedin introduces the petition. Attorney Ryan Carlucci introduces himself on behalf of the petitioner and discusses the new materials submitted. Mr. Carlucci notes that at a prior meeting the Board requested new plot plans showing the abutting properties and buildings, along with a table of dimensions showing conditions before and after the original construction. The new plot plan is presented showing the existing plan of land, along with two abutters at 7 and 9 March Street. Mr. Carlucci indicates the closest abutting lot line is now one foot away at the shortest point, rather than 1.8 feet. He also notes there was a question last time about which zone, R2 or B4, was less restrictive and which should apply. Mr. Viccica asks if the petitioner is aware of the letter that the Board received from counsel, and suggests the application may not be able to move forward. City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals August 21, 2024 Meeting Minutes Chair Vyedin asks for a five minute break to contact the city solicitor to discuss whether or not to move forward. The Board discusses the letter, noting that the property has no frontage and is undersized, and had an addition constructed without a permit extending into the B4 district, where single family use is prohibited. The current proposal increases nonconformities to lot area and frontage, and that while a special permit could be issued for a portion of the addition, no zoning relief is available to allow for the addition into the B4 zone. The Board explains that they cannot issue a use variance and introduce a new nonconforming use here. Mr. Viccia suggests the petitioner can continue and have their attorney contact the City because there are several issues to parse out before this can go before any city board. Chair Vyedin states the petitioner may continue or withdraw without prejudice. Mr. Carlucci asks to continue the petition. Motion and Vote: Mr. Viccica motions to continue the petition of JOHANE JEAN-BAPTISTE at 11 MARCH STREET (Map 36, Lot 176) (R2 Zoning District) for a Special Permit per Section 3.3.5 Nonconforming Single and Two-family Structures of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to expand an existing nonconforming structure with a 192 square foot, one story addition with a 1.8’ front yard setback where a 15’ front yard setback is required, a 3.4’ side yard setback, and a 25’ rear yard setback to the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals on September 18th, 2024. Ms. Simpson seconds the motion. The vote is five (5) in favor (Nina Vyedin, Ellen Simpson, Stephen Larrick, Carly McClain, and Paul Viccica.) and none (0) opposed. The motion passes. Location: 250, 260 Highland Avenue (Map 8, Lot 118) (B2 Zoning District) Applicant: PN Restaurants Project: A continuation of a public hearing for all persons interested in the petition of PN RESTAURANTS at 250 HIGHLAND AVENUE (Map 8, Lot 118) and 260 HIGHLAND AVENUE (Map 8, Lot 117) (B2 Zoning District) for a Variance from Section 6.7.6 Drive-Through Facilities, Standard 12-Minimum of 200 Feet from the Property Line of a Residential Use of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to a distance of 65 feet from the closest residential property line. Documents and Exhibitions  Application date-stamped April 18, 2024 and supporting documentation Chair Vyedin introduces the petition, and notes there is a request to continue. Attorney Joe Correnti introduces himself on behalf of the petitioner and clarifies that they decided not to go forward and wish to withdraw without prejudice. 2 City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals August 21, 2024 Meeting Minutes Motion and Vote: Mr. Viccica motions to withdraw without prejudice the petition of PN RESTAURANTS at 250 HIGHLAND AVENUE (Map 8, Lot 118) and 260 HIGHLAND AVENUE (Map 8, Lot 117) (B2 Zoning District) for a Variance from Section 6.7.6 Drive-Through Facilities, Standard 12-Minimum of 200 Feet from the Property Line of a Residential Use of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to a distance of 65 feet from the closest residential property line. Ms. McClain seconds the motion. The vote is four (4) in favor (Nina Vyedin, Ellen Simpson, Paul Viccica, Carly McClain) and none (0) opposed. The motion passes. REGULAR AGENDA Location: 197 Lafayette Street (Map 34, Lot 0472) (R3/EOCD Zoning Districts) Applicant: Paul Lynch Project: A public hearing for all persons interested in the petition of 2 WIZEMENN LLC at 197 LAFAYETTE STREET. (Map 34, Lot 0472) (R3/ECOD Zoning District) for Variances from Sections 4.1.1 Dimensional Requirements and 5.1.8 Required Parking Spaces of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to convert a multi-use building into a 3-family dwelling. 197 Lafayette Street is nonconforming for front yard setback where 12.6’ feet is sought and 15’ is required, and side yard setback where 4.9’ is sought and 20’ is required. In addition, a Variance from lot area requirements where 4,000’ is sought and 25,000’ is required. A Variance from Section 5.1.8 for Required Parking Spaces where 3 parking spaces will be provided and 5 parking spaces are required. Documents and Exhibitions  Application date-stamped June 17, 2024 and supporting documentation Chair Vyedin introduces the petition. Paul Lynch introduces himself on behalf of the petitioners, and states he is joined by project architect Derek Bloom. Mr. Lynch explains the request to change an existing nonconforming use to a conforming use, changing to a three-family home in an R3 zone. Mr. Lynch indicates the lot size is nonconforming, and that a variance per section 4.1.1 is required for the setbacks. He notes the building has existed since 1915 and that the present setback requirements cannot be made to be conforming while allowing for a conforming use. The proposal results in no change to the footprint or building character. Mr. Lynch also explains the requested variance for parking per section 5.1.8, as five spaces are required and the proposal only has three legal spaces. He states more parking would be provided if space were available, but notes that there is adequate pubic transit nearby. Mr. Bloom presents photos of the property, and explains that it is currently an optometrist office on the bottom floor with a residential unit above and an attic space. He describes the property and presents a site plan showing existing and proposed conditions. A new entrance will serve the basement and second floor unit, while the proposed first floor unit would use the front door to enter. Mr. Bloom states new window wells will serve the basement unit in front and back. He also notes that while there are only three legal spaces, there is adequate space for cars to park tandem, which would allow for six cars. A one story feature of the property will be extended to two stories, 3 City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals August 21, 2024 Meeting Minutes with no changes to existing setbacks. Mr. Bloom presents a chart with requirements and dimensions for the existing and proposed conditions, noting that the only metric that would change is lot area per dwelling unit. He next presents floor plans and elevations. Chair Vyedin asks the petitioner to discuss the statement of hardship. Mr. Lynch states that the lot and building have existed since 1915, and that the petitioner is not trying to change it to a conforming use and there are certain dimensional and parking requirements that are impossible due to the size and location of the property. Chair Vyedin asks if the proposal is for tandem parking or not. Mr. Lynch explains that there will be room for tandem parking, but that it is now allowed as legal parking and so there will only be three legal spaces, and that is why a variance for parking is needed. Ms. Simpson asks to see the parking and site plan again, and asks of the access is from Chase Street. Mr. Lynch confirms. Mr. Viccica asks about potential reconfigurations that could accommodate four or five parking. Mr. Lynch states the proposed configuration is what would work with legal spaces that should be nine by twenty feet. He also notes that the only access is from Chase Street, and that the proposal allowing for tandem parking, was best based on dimensional restrictions. Mr. Larrick asks about the parking spaces adding impervious surfaces and questions if the tandem spaces are needed. Mr. Lynch explains it will be a pervious surface and not a paved one. Chair Vyedin asks why the petitioner seeks three units instead of two, which would not require the parking variance. Mr. Lynch states it is partially for financial reasons, but also that it is more advantageous to have three units because of the size of the building. He indicates the goal is to utilize the building size to increase housing stock which is needed in the community. Mr. Laroe notes that a petition cannot design for tandem parking because regulations state you cannot block a vehicle. Chair Vyedin suggests the Board cannot approve design with tandem parking in it unless it is modified to three spaces. Mr. Lynch states they are not asking for tandem parking, just noting that the space is there for snow emergencies. He states the site plan submitted for approval will not show tandem parking. The Board and staff discuss the issue of tandem parking in more detail, and ultimately Mr. Laroe and the City Solicitor suggest a special condition that a new plan be submitted showing only three parking spaces. The petitioner agrees to the special condition. Chair Vyedin opens the floor to public comment but there is none. Motion and Vote: Ms. Simpson motions to approve the petition of 2 WIZEMENN LLC at 197 LAFAYETTE STREET. (Map 34, Lot 0472) (R3/ECOD Zoning District) for Variances from Sections 4.1.1 Dimensional Requirements and 5.1.8 Required Parking Spaces of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to convert a multi-use building into a 3-family dwelling, a variance from lot area requirements where 4,000’ is sought and 25,000’ is required, a variance from Section 5.1.8 for Required Parking Spaces where 3 parking spaces will be provided and 5 parking spaces are required, subject to the following standard conditions: 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statutes, ordinances, codes, and regulations. 4 City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals August 21, 2024 Meeting Minutes 2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted to and approved by the Building Commissioner. 3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 4. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction. 5. Exterior finishes of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing structure. 6. A Certificate of Occupancy is to be obtained. 7. A Certificate of Inspection is to be obtained. 8. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Planning Board. 9. Petitioner shall obtain street numbering from the City of Salem’s Assessor’s Office and shall display said number so as to be visible form the street. 10. Unless this Decision expressly provides otherwise, any zoning relief granted does not empower or authorize the Petitioner to demolish or reconstruct the structure(s) located on the subject property to an extent of more than fifty percent (50%) of its floor area or more than fifty percent (50%) of its replacement cost at the time of destruction. If the structure is demolished by any means to an extent of more than fifty percent (50%) of its replacement cost or more than fifty percent (50%) of its floor area at the time of destruction, it shall not be reconstructed except in conformity with the provisions of the Ordinance. 11. All construction shall be done per the plans and dimension submitted to and approved by this Board. Any modification to the plans and dimensions must be approved by the Board of Appeals unless such changes are deemed a minor field change by the Building Commissioner in consultation with the Chair of the Board of Appeals. 12. Petitioner shall schedule Assessing Department inspections of the property, at least annually, to project completion and a final inspection upon project completion. And the following special condition: 1. Petitioner shall submit an updated site plan that shows only three parking spaces, as a variance for three parking spaces that presently exist are what the Board approves. Mr. Larrick seconds the motion. The vote is five (5) in favor (Nina Vyedin, Paul Viccica, Carly McClain, Ellen Simpson, and Stephen Larrick) and none (0) opposed. The motion passes. Location: 56 Highland Avenue (Map 25, Lot 0015) (R2/EOCD Zoning Districts) Applicant: Nicole Roblero Project: A public hearing for all persons interested in the petition of NICOLE ROBLERO at 56 HIGHLAND AVENUE (Map 25, Lot 0015) (R2/ECOD Zoning Districts) for Variances from Section 8.2.4 Fences and Section 6.8 Visibility at Intersections of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to allow an already constructed 4-foot fence to remain on top of a constructed 4-foot retaining wall bringing the total height to 8 feet. In the ECOD, 4 feet is the maximum height allowed and at intersections no more than a height of 3 feet is allowed from street grade. 5 City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals August 21, 2024 Meeting Minutes Documents and Exhibitions  Application date-stamped June 18, 2024 and supporting documentation Chair Vyedin introduces the petition. Nicole and Alexandro Roblero introduce themselves and explain that they built a fence along their property line thinking as long as it was four feet tall it would be ok. Ms. Roblero further explains that one part of the yard slopes down and has a retaining wall, so the fence on top goes above the allowed four feet. She indicates that 85 percent of the fence is four feet with only some portions six inches above that. She also states they were not aware they were in an entrance corridor, which has the fence height restrictions. Chair Vyedin asks how high the fence is in the corner most affecting visibility, and Ms. Roblero states it is 4 feet 6 inches. Ms. Roblero contends the intersection visibility is not affected, and states she has pictures. She notes that the ordinance discusses a 25 foot triangular distance, which she claims the fence is well beyond and therefore should not be an issue. Mr. Viccica clarifies that the ordinance does not allow a maximum of four feet, but that the fence can be no more than a height of three feet from street grade, which is the level of the street not the top of the the retaining wall. He also notes that the triangular distance measurement stated in the ordinance is irrelevant. Mr. Viccica asks the petitioner about the need for the fence. Ms. Roblero explains they live on a corner and that the retaining wall is only two inches high, and she presents photographs. She also states there are similar fences on nearby houses. Ms. McClain asks the petitioner about the need for the fence as well. Ms. Roblero states it is a very busy street and that they have children and animals that like to play in the yard. She also states she would hate to cause an accident if a ball went into the street. She contends it is for the mutual safety of her family and drivers. Ms. Roblero also notes the presence of drunk disorderly people with the hospital across the street, and individuals sleeping in front of her home or cutting through her property to get to Proctor Street. She also notes finding trash in the yard prior to the fence construction, which has been mostly eliminated. The Board discusses at length the issue of the triangular measurement, ordinance language, fence height restrictions, and retaining walls. It is determined that the applicant has not provided adequate measurements and that they may wish to continue in order to submit more information. The Board discusses whether alternative options may exist to address the petitioners’ safety concerns while also complying with City ordinances. Mr. Viccica stresses that the visibility issue is a safety issue for pedestrians and cars, and that the ZBA must consider the safety of all residents. The Board continues to discuss whether the applicant should continue and whether any potential solution exists. Chair Vyedin suggests the petitioner reach out to the City for potential help with measurements, and that progress would be more likely if the petitioner returns with options and alternatives to the existing conditions and proposal. The petitioner requests a continuance. 6 City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals August 21, 2024 Meeting Minutes Motion and Vote: Mr. Viccica motions to continue the petition of NICOLE ROBLERO at 56 HIGHLAND AVENUE (Map 25, Lot 0015) (R2/ECOD Zoning Districts) for Variances from Section 8.2.4 Fences and Section 6.8 Visibility at Intersections of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to allow an already constructed 4-foot fence to remain on top of a constructed 4-foot retaining wall bringing the total height to 8 feet to the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals on September 18, 2024. Ms. Simpson seconds the motion. The vote is five (5) in favor (Nina Vyedin, Carly McClain, Ellen Simpson, Stephen Larrick, and Paul Viccica) and none (0) opposed. The motion passes. Location: 23 Naples Road (Map 32, Lot 0402) (R1 Zoning District) Applicant: Gabe Roses Project: A public hearing for all persons interested in the petition of GABE ROSES at 23 NAPLES ROAD (Map 32, Lot 0402) (R1 Zoning District) for a Special Permit per Section 3.3.5 Single- and TwoFamily Nonconforming Residential Structures of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to demolish an existing deck and to construct a new 13’ X 18’6” two-story deck and new stairwell for the upper level that is 4’ wide. 23 Naples Road is nonconforming in the rear and side yard setbacks. Documents and Exhibitions  Application date-stamped July 19, 2024 and supporting documentation Chair Vyedin introduces the petition. Gabe Roses introduces himself and explains he purchased the home in 2017 and that the wooden deck is now deteriorating. With the need for a new deck, Mr. Roses proposes to reconstruct one four feet larger in the back. Mr. Roses also explains the second floor deck will be half the size, but that there will be no stairs leading up just a sliding door for access. He presents a plot plan and photos of the existing deck, noting noncompliance with the rear setback. Mr. Roses also notes he submitted a letter from a rear abutter that they are fine with the proposal. Chair Vyedin states there are two letters in support, one from Councilor Jeff Cohen and one from a neighbor. Chair Vyedin opens the floor to public comment. Matt Rosadini and Jillian Rizzo of 21 Naples Road introduce themselves and state they are in the unfortunate position of objecting to the plans as set out, noting the proposal seems unclear. Ms. Rizzo states that they currently have a water view and that if there is a new deck with a pergola it would obstruct their water view from their yard. They suggest they are willing to continue ongoing discussions as they are friendly with their neighbors, but that the submitted materials seem to have inconsistent measurements. 7 City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals August 21, 2024 Meeting Minutes Ryan Newnan of 19 Naples Road introduces himself and states he had trouble understanding the plan because of minimal and vague dimensions. Mr. Newnan asks if every house going down will have their water view obstructed by the new deck, depending on the size of the second story. George Hoxha introduces himself and states he has a comment for the prior petition. Chair Vyedin states they can only discuss the current matter. Mr. Hoxha suggests glass railings instead of a pergola for the decks so as not to obstruct neighbors views. Chair Vyedin confirms a full design of the proposal was not submitted. She also notes that if a variance for height is not being requested, residences water views cannot be protected. She states she would like to see more design materials to know what the Board would be approving. Mr. Viccica also suggests more discussions with neighbors. Chair Vyedin asks the petitioner if they would like to continue, and they agree. Motion and Vote: Mr. Viccica motions to continue the petition of GABE ROSES at 23 NAPLES ROAD (Map 32, Lot 0402) (R1 Zoning District) for a Special Permit per Section 3.3.5 Single- and Two Family Nonconforming Residential Structures of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to demolish an existing deck and to construct a new 13’ X 18’6” two-story deck and new stairwell for the upper level that is 4’ wide, to the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals on September 18, 2024. Ms. Simpson seconds the motion. The vote is five (5) in favor (Nina Vyedin, Ellen Simpson, Paul Viccica, Carly McClain, and Stephen Larrick) and none (0) opposed. The motion passes. Location: 11 Foster Street (Map 26, Lot 0396) (R2 Zoning District) Applicant: Shelbyb LLC Project: A public hearing for all persons interested in the petition of WILLIAM F. QUINN f/b/o SHELBYB LLC at 11 FOSTER STREET (Map 26, Lot 0396) (R2 Zoning District) for an Appeal of a Decision of the Building Inspector that denied the application to develop a 2- dwelling unit into a 5-dwelling unit. In addition, the Applicant is seeking a Special Permit per Section 3.3.3 Nonconforming Structures of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to extend, alter and substantially change to a substantially different purpose of converting a 2-family dwelling to a 5-family dwelling. The Applicant is seeking Variances from Section 4.1.1 Dimensional Requirements for lot area per dwelling unit of 3,000 square feet where 7,500 square feet is required, and lot coverage of 53.8% where 35% is the maximum allowed. A Variance from Section 5.1 Off-street Parking to have 7 parking spaces, where 8 is required and Section 5.1.5 Design to have a driveway width of 11 feet, where 12 feet is required. Documents and Exhibitions  Application date-stamped July 24, 2024 and supporting documentation Chair Vyedin introduces the petition. 8 City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals August 21, 2024 Meeting Minutes Attorney Bill Quinn introduces himself on behalf of the petitioner, and states architect Dan Ricciarelli is also present. Mr. Quinn explains that the petitioner purchased the property in 2020 and had been looking for an opportunity to redevelop it. The building was built in 1962 as a concrete block, according to Mr. Quinn, and there are some similar buildings in the neighborhood along with residences. The property has always been used commercially and no one has lived there. Mr. Quinn states that in 1962 the building was erected for a roofing shop and office, and that this was prior to modern zoning and therefore grandfathered in. In 1983 a special permit was issued to use the property as a woodworking shop, and in 1988 a special permit was obtained to extend the nonconforming shop use to construct a second floor addition, presumably for office space. Mr. Quinn indicates the most recent active use of the property was in 1994 when Kiddie Coop, a daycare, bought and used the building. The building was non-residential up until the sale in 2020. Mr. Quinn notes that because the building has not been used since sale, the special use period of two years lapsed. After seeking various routes and discussing with the City Solicitor and Building Inspector, Mr. Quinn explains that Ms. Orfanos opined that the use could not be expanded, but that the petitioner could appeal if they wished, and that is why the petitioner is before the Board presently. Mr. Quinn states they seek that the Board find they have jurisdiction to consider the relief for a five family property, and if so, to review the plan as the Board would for any other applicant. He further explains the provisions of the ordinance and the relief being sought. Mr. Quinn continues to discuss the petition and R2 zoning, noting the plan would be to rehabilitate the two story structure, demolish an attached 1.5 story storage area, and extend to build three townhouses, for a total of five units. Mr. Quinn suggests this is the best proposal possible based on the density, and that it would allow his client to sell or rent the units at a price significantly lower than those prevailing in Salem. He states this is a good, desirable project, that would clearly be within the meaning of Section 3.3.3 as a type of project that expands an existing use that could be considered by the Board. Chair Vyedin asks about the change of use, and Mr. Vicca asks if the property was ever residential and the answer is it was not. Mr. Viccica states that multi-family dwellings are not allowed in the R2 zone, only single family, two family, and businesses, and that he is not sure the arguments presented here are compelling. Mr. Quinn suggests Section 3.3.3 allows for one nonconforming use to change into another nonconforming use. Mr. Viccica states if the petition were to put a rooming board or lodging house on the property the Board could listen to the petition, or any other proposal, but that the petitioner chose to propose a nonconforming use expressly prohibited in the R2 zone. Mr. Quinn and the Board discuss the matter more, and Ms. Simpson asks if it would be possible to find a way to move forward if the project were to be deemed beneficial to the City. Mr. Viccica clarifies that the request before the Board is an appeal of a decision by the Building Inspector, a legal challenge, and that must be considered before any further proposal evaluated. The petitioner and Board continue to discuss the matter, the lapsed special permit, and prior uses at the property. There is further discussion about what the Board is being asked to vote on, and the extent of the Board’s jurisdiction. Mr. Viccica clarifies that in the past the Board has been asked to hold or deny appeals on building inspector decisions, and that it is clearly within the purview of this Board. After further discussion, Mr. Quinn asks if he may continue for additional consultation with the City Solicitor. He asks to continue to the October meeting. 9 City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals August 21, 2024 Meeting Minutes Motion and Vote: Ms. McClain motions to continue the petition of WILLIAM F. QUINN f/b/o SHELBYB LLC at 11 FOSTER STREET (Map 26, Lot 0396) (R2 Zoning District) for an Appeal of a Decision of the Building Inspector that denied the application to develop a 2- dwelling unit into a 5-dwelling unit, as well as relief for a Special Permit per Section 3.3.3 Nonconforming Structures of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to extend, alter and substantially change to a substantially different purpose of converting a 2- family dwelling to a 5-family dwelling, Variances from Section 4.1.1 Dimensional Requirements for lot area per dwelling unit of 3,000 square feet where 7,500 square feet is required, and lot coverage of 53.8% where 35% is the maximum allowed, and Variances from Section 5.1 Off-street Parking to have 7 parking spaces, where 8 is required and Section 5.1.5 Design to have a driveway width of 11 feet, where 12 feet is required to the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals on October 16, 2024. Ms. Simpson seconds the motion. The vote is five (5) in favor (Nina Vyedin, Ellen Simpson, Paul Viccica, Carly McClain, and Stephen Larrick) and none (0) opposed. The motion passes. Location: 2 Lowell Street (Map 45, Lot 0013) (B2 Zoning District) Applicant: Matt Centorino Project: A public hearing for all persons interested in the petition of MATT CENTORINO at 2 LOWELL STREET. (Map 45, Lot 0013) (B2 Zoning District) for a Special Permit per Section 3.1.2 Special Permit: Zoning Board of Appeals to operate a limited boat repair service on site and in the petitioner’s garage. Documents and Exhibitions  Application date-stamped July 30, 2024 and supporting documentation Chair Vyedin introduces the petition. Matt Centorino introduces himself and explains that he has had a mobile boat repair service since 1986 and that he has been working partially out of his property for 27 years. Mr. Centorino explains that his license to operate expired and he could not find his paperwork from 27 years ago, and is therefore applying like new. He explains that like an electrician or plumber, 80 percent of his work and services are conducted offsite. Mr. Centorino states he has clients waiting for him to resume operation and that he is just trying to get his business going once again. Chair Vyedin explains this is allowed by a special permit with Board vote of approval, and asks if there are any questions. There are none. Chair Vyedin opens the floor to public comment, noting there were four comment letters submitted. Ward 1 City Councilor Cindy Jerzylo introduces herself and expresses concerns, stating she received some complaints about Mr. Centorino operating his business at his residence. Councilor Jerzylo contends he works on boat engines in the street and paints boats with no regard to gasoline, paint, or oil drips. She also notes that parking is tight in the neighborhood, and asks that the Board 10 City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals August 21, 2024 Meeting Minutes conduct due diligence, and asks that the petitioner obtain all proper permits from the fire department and any other city departments. Mike Smith of 8 Driscoll Street in Peabody, MA introduces himself and states he works in Salem. Mr. Smith indicates Mr. Centorino works on his boat and that he is very pleasant to work with and considerate. He also states Mr. Centorino has always been careful with disposal of gasoline and oil. Rosemary Bane Bogan of 4 Lowell Street introduces herself as a neighbor and states she submitted comments. Ms. Bogan contends there is no room in the applicants garage to put boats, and no driveway, and expresses concern the boats will be in the street. She also expresses concerns regarding disposal of fluids, and other maintenance related debris. Chair Vyedin notes the proposal is an allowed use in the B2 zoning district. Ms. Vyedin asks Ms. Orfanos what other enforcement the City would have if the Board were to approve. Ms. Orfanos indicates the petitioner would need to propose a plan to the engineering department for review to determine if everything is appropriate, and that inspectors would come to inspect the property. Mr. Centorino suggests that some neighbors run their generators longer than he runs engines when testing, as he does it for five minutes or less. He also states he does not do any painting of boats, as a contractor does. Mr. Centorino argues he is always conscientious about neighbors and that he has agreed to no longer park any boats on the street. Mr. Viccica asks how large the boats being delivered would be, and Mr. Centorino states most likely no larger than 22 feet. Mr. Viccica asks about hazardous waste disposal, and Mr. Centorino indicates he recycles gear oil and properly disposes of any other waste. Belle Steadman of Salem attempts to provide comment but has technical difficulties. The Chair indicates the Board received a comment letter from Ms. Steadman. E. Klein of 43 Bayview Avenue introduces themselves and states they have known Mr. Centorino a long time and that he is an upstanding business owner. He speaks in favor of the petition. Motion and Vote: Mr. Viccica motions to approve the petition of MATT CENTORINO at 2 LOWELL STREET. (Map 45, Lot 0013) (B2 Zoning District) for a Special Permit per Section 3.1.2 Special Permit: Zoning Board of Appeals to operate a limited boat repair service on site and in the petitioner’s garage, subject to the following standard conditions: 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statutes, ordinances, codes, and regulations. 2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted to and approved by the Building Commissioner. 3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 4. A Certificate of Occupancy is to be obtained. 5. A Certificate of Inspection is to be obtained. 6. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Planning Board. 7. Petitioner shall schedule Assessing Department inspections of the property, at least annually, to project completion and a final inspection upon project completion. 11 City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals August 21, 2024 Meeting Minutes Ms. McClain seconds the motion. The vote is five (5) in favor (Nina Vyedin, Ellen Simpson, Paul Viccica, Carly McClain, and Stephen Larrick) and none (0) opposed. The motion passes. MEETING MINUTES July 17, 2024 No Board members have edits. Motion and Vote: Mr. Viccica motions to approve the minutes from the July 17, 2024 meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals, as drafted Ms. Simpson seconds the motion. The vote is five (5) in favor and none (0) opposed. The motion passes. OLD/NEW BUSINESS Variance Extension Request for 11 1/2 Hardy Street Chair Vyedin introduces the petition. Attorney Bill Quinn introduces himself on behalf of the petitioner, and explains an extension is needed because the project has been lengthy and expensive to restore and use a third floor apartment that had been torn out several years prior. He indicates the Board approved a special permit and variances, and that while the special permit is valid for two years, the variance is only valid for one year. Therefore, the petitioner seeks a six month extension of the variance to complete the work and project. Mr. Viccica recuses himself and explains his wife is the architect on the project since work began. Motion and Vote: Ms. McClain motions to approve the Variance extension request for 11 1/2 Hardy Street for 6 months to February 14, 2025. Mr. Larrick seconds the motion. The vote is four (4) in favor and none (0) opposed. The motion passes. Next Meeting September 18, 2024 ADJOURNMENT Motion and Vote: Mr. Viccica motions to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Larrick seconds the motion. The vote is all in favor. The motion passes. The meeting ends at 10:02 PM on August 21, 2024. 12 City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals August 21, 2024 Meeting Minutes For actions where the decisions have not been fully written into these minutes, copies of the Decisions have been posted separately by address or project at: https://www.salem.com/zoning-board-appeals/pages/zoning-board-appeals-decisions-2024 Respectfully submitted, Brennan Postich, City Staff Planner 13