Loading...
42 Walter Street ZBA Stamped Decision �ONDIT y k. CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS o ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 98 WASHINGTON STREET♦ SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970 DOMINICK PANGALLO TEL:978-619-5685 ^ MAYOR frt': September 30, 2025 Decision ' City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals The petition of HILARY IPPOLITO-WAN at 42 WALTER STREET (Map 27, Lot 0384) (R2 Zoning District) for a Variance per Section 5.1.5(6.c.) Design to allow an entrance drive of twenty-eight feet (28') where twenty feet (20') is the maximum allowed. On September 17, 2025, the following members of the Salem Zoning Board of Appeals were present: Hannah Osthoff(Acting Chair), Peter Habib, Christa McGaha, Stephen Larrick, and Ellen Simpson. Nina Vyedin was absent. Statements of Fact: The petition was date-stamped on August 12, 2025. The petitioner sought Zoning Board of Appeals approval for an entrance drive of twenty-eight feet (28'). 1. Hilary Ippolito and Winston Wan own 42 Walter Street. 2. Hilary Ippolito-Wan was the petitioner. 3. Hilary Ippolito-Wan and Winston Wan presented on September 17, 2025. 4. 42 Walter Street is in the R2 Zoning District (Map 27, Lot 0384). 5. On September 17, 2025, Hilary Ippolito-Wan presented plans to create a twenty-eight- foot (28') entrance drive where twenty feet (20') are allowed. Ms. Ippolito-Wan stated that the submitted plot plan was not certified. She added that the submitted plot plan would sensibly describe the changes they want to make. 6. Ms. Ippolito-Wan stated that they currently have eighteen feet (18') of entryway for a vehicle to enter the property,while the allowed width is twenty feet(20') in the R2 Zoning District.She noted that the eighteen feet(18')they have leads directly to a two-car garage where modern vehicles do not fit into either door. Ms. Ippolito-Wan stated that neither of their vehicles fit in the garage. She added that there is room next to the garage for a vehicle to be parked off the street. Ms. Ippolito-Wan noted that they must have an additional ten feet (10') of entryway to access that part of the property. 7. Ms. Ippolito-Wan stated that 1.5 parking spaces are required for a single-family home and added that zero (0) spaces are usable inside the existing garage. She noted that they are requesting one (1) outdoor usable parking space. City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals September 30, 2025 Page 2 of 6 8. Ms. Ippolito-Wan showed the submitted plot plan to the Board. The plot plan showed a ten-foot (10') shaded area depicting the additional proposed space for a curb cut. The plot plan showed a driveway to the right of the curb cut accessing the two-car garage. 9. Ms. Ippolito-Wan stated that the proposed ten-foot (10') area would allow a vehicle to drive onto the property into the off-street parking space. She added that a vehicle would currently have to drive up the curb to access the space. Ms. Ippolito-Wan stated that their neighbors sometimes parallel park along the property line. She added that the curb currently fits three(3) parallel parked cars end-to-end and noted that it would still be able to park three (3) parallel parked cars end-to-end. 10. Acting Chair Hannah Osthoff asked to view photos or views of the property. Mr. Habib showed a view of 42 Walter Street from Google Earth. Mr. Habib stated that the Applicant is proposing to replace ten feet (10') of curb with a curb cut and driveway. 11. The Google Earth view showed a square building,which Ms. Ippolito-Wan stated was the unusable garage. Ms. Ippolito-Wan stated that the area to the left of the garage showed a white car, which is where they would park. 12. Mr. Habib showed a view of 42 Walter Street from Google Street View. Ms. Ippolito stated that the proposal would remove a large single granite curb and a smaller granite curb to the left of it, when viewed from Manning Street. Mr. Habib asked whether the proposal would remove the granite curbing up to the existing wall. Ms. Ippolito-Wan stated that they would be removing the curb in line with where the existing wall is located. 13. Mr. Larrick asked how the Applicant currently uses the garage structure. Ms. Ippolito-Wan stated that they used to use the garage for parking when their car fit inside the garage. She added that they now use the garage to store tools and bicycles. Mr. Larrick asked whether the Applicant would be able to create a twenty-foot (20') curb cut by starting at the existing wall and extending another ten feet (10') in front of the garage. Ms. Ippolito- Wan stated that they could consider that. 14. Building Commissioner Stavroula Orfanos stated that the Department of Public Services would oversee curbing. She added that she would be unsure whether the Department of Public Services would put a curb back in if it would block the garage doors. 15. Mr. Habib stated that he would rather allow an extension of the curb cut. He stated that the change could hinder the ability of these property owners or future property owners to use the garage for a motorcycle or a smaller car. Mr. Larrick stated that he was cognizant of the amount of parking the Board tacitly supports and the built environment the Board creates in the City. He added that the Board has allowed large curb cuts in the past to the detriment of the public realm. 16. Ms. Ippolito-Wan stated that they are a one-car household with two (2) drivers. She added that they intend to remain a one-car household. Ms. Ippolito-Wan stated that they don't intend to add more traffic to the streets or to create more burden. She noted that they are trying to minimize the upheaval that the many different uses for their garage could create for their neighborhood. 17. Ms. Ippolito-Wan stated that they are making the project as small as they can to minimize the effort and budget required, and the nuisance to the neighborhood. Mr. Larrick asked City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals September 30, 2025 Page 3 of 6 whether the Applicant considered renovating the garage instead to fit their needs. Ms. Ippolito-Wan stated that renovating the garage was not within their budget. 18. Mr. Habib asked what the width of the garage doors was. Ms. Ippolito-Wan stated that she did not know. Mr. Larrick stated that the application said that, combined,both garage doors were eighteen feet (18') wide. Mr. Habib stated that there is a separation between the two garage doors, making the space even smaller. 19. Mr. Habib stated that there is a minor safety concern due to having a curb cut close to the intersection of Walter and Manning Street. He added that typically there would be fifty to seventy-five feet (50'-75') of space between the edge of the curb and where the curb cut will be. Mr. Habib stated that the curb cut would create a sixty-foot(60') curb. 20. Acting Chair Osthoff stated that the curb cut feels far enough away from the intersection. She added that the Applicant talked about how many cars can fit along the street and noted that they would be able to fit the same number of cars with the curb cut. Acting Chair Osthoff stated that the proposal would provide an easier way for the Applicant to park off-street and leave on-street parking for others. 21. Ms. Ippolio-Wan stated that neighbors park in front of their home during construction or when their driveways are taken up. She added that removing their car from that situation would provide more space for neighbors to park along the street. 22. Mr. Larrick stated he is not concerned about the safety of the project. He asked the Applicant to review the Statement of Hardship. Ms. Ippolito-Wan read the submitted Statement of Hardship: We currently have no access to off-street parking at our home on Walter Street. Our lot, 42 Walter Street, includes a decades-old garage with openings too narrow for most modern cars to fit. When we need to move our vehicle off-street to allow for street cleaning,snow removal, or infrastructural work,we are currently forced to drive onto our property by passing over a granite curb. Attempting to drive onto and off of our property with the current granite curb has resulted in damage to our vehicle, and it also slows the process of entering and exiting which causes traffic to stop on our street. Parking on the street forces us to occupy space that could be used by other neighbors' vehicles and visitors when needed.There is currently about sixty-six(66) feet of curb along this section of our property, which has been able to accommodate up to three (3) parallel parked vehicles. With the proposed curb cut there would still be fifty-six (56) feet of curb left, which is still enough for three (3) parallel parked vehicles—and we would no longer need to occupy one of those spots, allowing neighbors and visitors to more readily and easily access parking on our street. 23. Mr. Habib stated that the existing garage doors are well under a standard eight-foot (8') garage door width. He added that the garage door is not suitable for most modern-day cars. He noted that it would be fair to make the property a safer condition for the Applicant, so they are not driving on a curb and potentially creating traffic issues. 24. Ms. McGaha stated that she believed what is being proposed would be a better option than moving the drive because that would decommission the garage. Mr. Habib stated City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals September 30, 2025 Page 4 of 6 the doors are likely at or under seven feet (7') wide. Ms. McGaha stated that whether the garage is a reasonable size would be a factor in deciding on the proposal. 25. Ms. Simpson stated that she hoped the garage could have 1.5 cars in the future. She added that the curb cut would be a reasonable use for what would be a driveway anyway. 26. Acting Chair Osthoff opened the hearing for public comments. 27. The City received zero (0) public comments on the proposal before the hearing. At the September 17, 2025 public hearing, zero (0) members of the public commented on the proposal. 28. Staff Planner Brennan Postich stated that he emailed the Chair of the Board to determine whether the application is complete. He added that the Chair deferred that decision to the Board. He noted that the Chair suggested the Board add a special condition stating that the petitioner shall provide a certified plot plan. Acting Chair Osthoff stated that she would be comfortable with a special condition stating that a certified plot plan should be completed before beginning any work. Ms. Ippolito-Wan stated that they would be okay with the proposed special condition. Building Commissioner Stavroula Orfanos stated that the Building Department and Engineering Department would require a certified plot plan for an application. 29. Ms. McGaha stated that the Board should add a special condition so that the Board would be able to say a certified plot plan is required and conditioned every time. Mr. Larrick and Mr. Habib agreed. 30. Staff Planner Postich proposed wording for a special condition: The petitioner shall provide a certified plot plan to the Building Commissioner, or their designee, before altering the width of the entrance drive located at 42 Walter Street. The petitioner shall return to the Board to amend the decision if the certified plot plan significantly differs from the non-certified plot plan. 31. Ms. McGaha motioned to approve the petition with the special condition proposed by Staff Planner Postich. Mr. Habib seconded the motion. The Salem Zoning Board of Appeals, after carefully considering the evidence presented at the public hearings, and thoroughly reviewing the petition, application narrative, and plans, makes the following findings that the proposed project meets the provisions of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance: Variance Findings: 1. Special conditions and circumstances especially affect the land, building, or structure involved,generally not affecting other lands, buildings,and structures in the same district. The Applicant owns a uniquely small garage with a curb that prohibits access to the property. 2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Ordinance involves substantial hardship to the Applicant in attempting to put the property to productive use. Literally enforcing the provisions of the Ordinance would require the Applicant to undertake a costly reconstruction to park vehicles in the garage. Literal enforcement would also create City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals September 30, 2025 Page 5 of 6 continued traffic issues and damage to the Applicant's vehicle in attempting to use the property's off-street parking space. 3. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good, and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or purpose of the Ordinance. The proposal frees an off-street parking space for public use. The relief granted by the Board allows the petitioner to avoid potentially dangerous traffic interactions. The proposal provides the minimum relief required to allow the petitioner to put their property to productive use. Based on the above statements of fact and findings, the Salem Zoning Board of Appeals voted five (5)in favor, (Hannah Osthoff(Acting Chair), Peter Habib, Christa McGaha, Stephen Larrick, and Ellen Simpson) and zero (0) opposed, to grant Hilary Ippolito-Wan at 42 Walter Street (Map 27, Lot 0384) (112 Zoning District) a Variance per Section 5.1.5(6.c.) Design to allow an entrance drive of twenty-eight feet (28') where twenty feet (20') is the maximum allowed. 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. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any city board or commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to,the Planning Board. 7. 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. 8. 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. 9. Petitioner shall schedule Assessing Department inspections of the property, at least annually, prior to project completion and a final inspection upon project completion. Special Conditions: City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals September 30, 2025 Page 6of6 1. The petitioner shall provide a certified plot plan to the Building Commissioner, or their designee, before altering the width of the entrance drive located at 42 Walter Street. The petitioner shall return to the Board to amend the decision if the certified plot plan significantly differs from the non-certified plot plan. ,VaAAaA 0J61to1,B)0 Hannah Osthoff, Acting Chair Zoning 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 Southern Essex Registry of Deeds.