30 Leavitt Street ZBA Final Decision
DOMINICK PANGALLO
MAYOR
CITY OF SALEM
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
CITY HALL ANNEX 2ND FLOOR, 98 WASHINGTON STREET SALEM MA 01970
December 2, 2025
Decision
City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
The petition of the CITY OF SALEM at 30 LEAVITT STREET (Map 34, Lot 0455) (RC Zoning District;
Coastal Resiliency Overlay District) for a Special Permit per Section 3.3.3 Nonconforming
Structures to reconstruct a former community resource building into a Salem Public Schools
welcome center and add a second-floor addition thirty-two feet (32’) from the front property
line.
On November 19, 2025, the following members of the Salem Zoning Board of Appeals were
present: Nina Vyedin (Chair), Hannah Osthoff, Peter Habib, Christa McGaha, and Stephen Larrick.
Ellen Simpson was absent.
Statements of Fact:
The petition was date-stamped on October 14, 2025. The petitioner sought Zoning Board of
Appeals approval for a Salem Public Schools welcome center.
1. The City of Salem owns 30 Leavitt Street. The City of Salem was the petitioner.
2. William Peterson was the representative for the City of Salem. William Peterson
presented on November 19, 2025.
3. 30 Leavitt Street is in the Residential Conservation (RC) Zoning District, Coastal Resiliency
Overlay District (C-ROD), and Flood Hazard Overlay District (FHOD) (Map 34, Lot 0455).
4. November 19, 2025, Mr. Peterson introduced the petition on behalf of the City of Salem.
He stated that the Salem Family Welcome Center is adaptively reusing an over one-
hundred-year-old building at Palmer Cove Park. He added that the building would be a
one-stop shop resource center for nurses, case workers, school resource officers, and
various agencies to help families become associated with the school system.
5. Mr. Peterson stated that the building sits at an approximately ten-foot (10’) Base Flood
Elevation (BFE), which is where the finished floor elevation is located. He added that any
new renovations would be two feet (2’) above that. Mr. Peterson noted that they propose
to raise the structure above the foundation, modify the foundation, and build a new
structure atop the modified foundation.
6. Mr. Peterson stated that they are looking for dimensional relief from the front setback.
He added that they propose to maintain the thirty-two-foot (32’) setback for an existing
nonconforming building on a three-fourths-acre site. Mr. Peterson noted that they would
City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
December 2, 2025
Page 2 of 4
reconstruct the first floor and add a second-floor addition to the building. He added that
they would add stairs and ramps to make the building more accessible because they
would raise the finished floor level by two feet (2’).
7. Chair Vyedin stated that the type of relief the Applicant needs may be different than what
was advertised. She noted that areas for vertical circulation are permitted in the required
setbacks and noted that the proposal did not change the building’s setback requirements.
Mr. Peterson stated that they would be constructing a second-story addition, violating
the Zoning Ordinance’s setback requirements. Chair Vyedin stated that the Board could
grant a Special Permit under Special 3.3.3 Nonconforming Structures of the Salem Zoning
Ordinance.
8. Staff Planner Brennan Postich referenced Section 3.3.3 Nonconforming Structures of the
Salem Zoning Ordinance, stating that:
“The Board of Appeals may award a Special Permit to reconstruct, extend, alter, or change
a nonconforming structure in accordance with this section only if it determines that such
reconstruction, extension, alteration, or change shall not be substantially more
detrimental than the existing nonconforming structure to the neighborhood. The
following types of changes to nonconforming structures may be considered by the Board
of Appeals:
1. Reconstructed, extended or structurally changed;
2. Altered to provide for a substantially different purpose or for the same purpose in a
substantially different manner or to a substantially greater extent.”
9. Chair Vyedin stated that the change to a request per Section 3.3.3 Nonconforming
Structures made sense. Ms. Osthoff stated the change made sense. Chair Vyedin stated
that a Special Permit seemed more appropriate for the proposal.
10. Mr. Peterson stated that they had no objections to the change.
11. Mr. Larrick stated that other municipalities have special considerations or exemptions for
City proposals that may be less stringent. He asked Staff Planner Brennan Postich whether
there were any considerations for these exemptions.
12. Staff Planner Brennan Postich stated that while Massachusetts courts have upheld
municipalities not holding a public hearing for proposals within required setbacks, there
was consideration for abutters being notified of property changes occurring within the
property’s required setbacks.
13. Ms. McGaha asked whether the Board would be able to change the relief to Section 3.3.3
Nonconforming Structures because it was advertised under Section 4.1.1 Dimensional
Requirements. Chair Vyedin stated that the Applicant would not need to readvertise if the
nature of the requested relief remained the same.
14. Chair Vyedin opened the hearing for public comments. The City received zero (0) public
comments on the proposal before the hearing. At the November 19, 2025, public hearing,
zero (0) members of the public commented on the proposal.
City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
December 2, 2025
Page 3 of 4
15. Chair Vyedin stated that she had visited the site and believed the property to be a good
location for the use. She added that the use would be a great way to take a lot from an
unusable building and put something nice in it.
16. Mr. Larrick stated that the proposed building would not be more detrimental and added
that the proposal would be an improvement for the community.
17. Mr. Larrick motioned to approve the petition. Ms. McGaha 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 Salem Zoning Ordinance’s provisions:
Special Permit Findings:
The Board finds that the reconstruction, extension, alteration, or change will not be substantially
more detrimental than the existing nonconforming structure to the neighborhood.
1. Community needs are served by the proposal. The Applicant is creating a welcome center
for Salem Public Schools, providing various social and health services. The proposal
creates an accessible entryway into a currently inaccessible building.
2. The proposal positively impacts traffic flow and safety. The Applicant provided adequate
parking in a walkable area of the City. The new structure will increase safety by
remodeling a currently unused building.
3. The proposal has minimal impacts on utilities and other public services. Adequate utilities
and other public services already service the structure.
4. The proposal has minimal negative impacts and substantial positive impacts on
neighborhood character. The structure’s footprint will not change aside from slight rear
setback changes. The structure provides a new design and increases the building
standards for a currently underutilized building.
5. The proposal has minimal impacts on the natural environment, including greenhouse gas
emissions and view. The proposal minimally increases the structure’s footprint while
having a design that accommodates the area’s current and future flood elevations.
6. The proposal has a positive potential economic and fiscal impact, including impacts on
City services, tax base, and employment. The proposal will increase the number and
variety of City services for Salem residents.
Based on the above statements of fact and findings, the Salem Zoning Board of Appeals voted
five (5) in favor, (Nina Vyedin (Chair), Hannah Osthoff, Peter Habib, Christa McGaha, and
Stephen Larrick) and zero (0) opposed, to grant of the CITY OF SALEM at 30 LEAVITT STREET (Map
34, Lot 0455) (RC Zoning District; Coastal Resiliency Overlay District) a Special Permit per Section
3.3.3 Nonconforming Structures to reconstruct a former community resource building into a
Salem Public Schools welcome center and add a second-floor addition thirty-two feet (32’) from
the front property line.
City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
December 2, 2025
Page 4 of 4
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 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 Assessor’s Office and shall
display said number so as to be visible from 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 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.
12. Petitioner shall schedule Assessing Department inspections of the property, at least
annually, prior to project completion and a final inspection upon project completion.
__________________________
Nina Vyedin, 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.