8 Woodbury Court Zoning Board of Appeals Decision 04.30.24
DOMINICK PANGALLO
MAYOR
CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF APPEALS
98 WASHINGTON STREET ♦ SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970
TEL: 978-619-5685
April 30, 2024
Decision
City of Salem Board of Appeals
The petition of MANDEE SPITTLE at 8 WOODBURY COURT (Map 36, Lot 005) (R2 Zoning
District) for a Special Permit per Section 3.3.5 Nonconforming Single- and Two-family
Structures of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to demolish an existing deck and to construct
a new 5.5’ x 7.5’ one-story addition with a deck that measures 9’ x 15.5’. The proposed
addition will be two (2) feet from the rear yard setback. In the R2, thirty (30) feet for the
rear yard setback is required.
A public hearing on the above petition was opened on April 17th, 2024, and was closed
on Apil 17, 2024.
On April 17th, 2024, the following members of the Salem Board of Appeals were present:
Nina Vyedin (Chair), Carly McClain, Hannah Osthoff, Stephen Larrick and Ellen Simpson
Statements of Fact:
The petition is date stamped February 29, 2024. The Petitioner seeks the Board of
Appeals approval to demolish an existing deck and then construct a one-story addition
with a new larger deck.
1. 8 Woodbury Court is owned by Mandee Spittle.
2. The Petitioner was Helen F. Sides on behalf of Jeremy and Mandee Spittle.
3. 8 Woodbury Court is in the R2 Zoning District (Map 36, Lot 005).
4. Board member Paul Viccica recused himself from participating in the petition.
5. On April 17th, 2024, Mandee and Jeremy Spittle presented the requested relief to
the board.
6. The Petitioner requests to extend their mudroom over the existing porch and to
remove and replace the stairs for the back porch.
7. The current stairs from the deck exit into the backyard. These stairs will be
removed. The intent is to expand the mudroom to make the proposed addition the
main entrance to the home.
8. There will be an increase in the width of the new stairs. There will be new handrails
for the proposed stairs. These changes are to accommodate the Petitioner’s child,
who has special needs.
City of Salem Board of Appeals
4/30/2024
Page 2 of 4
9. Chair Vyedin inquired about the easement at the rear of the property shown on
the survey. The Petitioner stated there was an addition on the home before the
Spittles had purchased it, addition extends into Gonyea Park’s property.
10. Mr. Spittle said there was a home rule petition supported by the City Council and
sent to the state legislature to grant the easement into Gonyea Park. Mr. Spittle
stated the easement was granted on September 10, 2001.
11. The proposed deck and addition will meet the required ten (10) feet side yard
setback. The proposed deck will not increase any nonconformity of the rear
setback at two (2) feet, where thirty (30) feet is required.
12. There were no further questions from the board.
13. There were no public comments.
14. Chair Vyedin reviewed the submitted special permit criteria.
The Salem Board of Appeals, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the
public hearings, and after thorough review of the petition, including the application
narrative and plans, makes the following findings that the proposed project meets the
provisions of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance:
Special Permit Findings:
The board finds that the adverse effects of the proposed use will not outweigh its
beneficial impacts to the city or the neighborhood, in view of the particular characteristics
of the site, and of the proposal in relation to that site. In addition to any specific factors
that may be set forth in this ordinance, the determination includes consideration of each
of the following:
1. Social, economic, or community needs are served by this proposal: there will be
no effect on the social, economic or community needs by this proposal.
2. Traffic flow and safety, including parking and loading: there will be no effect on
traffic flow and safety or parking by this proposal.
3. Adequate utilities and other public services already service the structure: there will
be no change with utilities at the site with this project.
4. Impacts on the natural environment, including drainage: there will be no impact
on the natural environment.
5. Neighborhood character: the project is in keeping with the neighborhood
character.
Potential fiscal impact, including impact on City tax base and employment: There will be
no impact on the city tax base with this project. On the basis of the above statements of
City of Salem Board of Appeals
4/30/2024
Page 3 of 4
fact and findings, the Salem Board of Appeals voted five (5) in favor (Nina Vyedin
(Chair), Carly McClain, Stephen Larrick, Ellen Simpson, Hannah Osthoff)) and
none (0) opposed to grant MANDEE SPITTLE a Special Permit per Section 3.3.5
Nonconforming Single- and Two-family Structures of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to
demolish an existing deck and then to construct a new 5.5’ x 7.5’ one-story addition with
a deck that measures 9’ x 15.5’, subject to the following terms, conditions and safeguards:
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. 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 Inspection is to be obtained.
7. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any city board or commission having
jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Planning Board.
8. 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.
9. All construction shall be done per the plans and dimensions 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.
10. Petitioner shall schedule Assessing Department inspections of the property, at least
annually, prior to project completion and a final inspection upon project
completion.
City of Salem Board of Appeals
4/30/2024
Page 4 of 4
__________________________
Nina Vyedin, Chair
Board of Appeals
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 Section 17 of the
Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, and shall be filed within 20 days of filing of
this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to the Massachusetts General Laws
Chapter 40A, Section 11, the Variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take
effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certificate of the City Clerk has been filed
with the Essex South Registry of Deeds.