134-142 CANAL STREET - ZBA mmomr
MMW
um.] CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF APPEAL
'g 120 WASHINGTON STREET. 3RO FLOOR
SALEM. MASSACHUSETTS 01970
TELEPHONE. 978-745-9595
FAX. 978-740-9846 ,
KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL
MAYOR
February 23, 2007 0
rn ��
Decision N mac.
Petition of National Grid Wireless requesting a Variance Cfl C:)r-
Tr -
for the property at 134-142 Canal Street D „3
City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals 4 ma
cn Y
A public hearing on the above petition was opened on January 17, 2007 pursuant to
Massachusetts General Law Ch. 40A, Sec. 11. The following Zoning Board members
were present: Nina Cohen, Richard Dionne, Steven Pinto, Elizabeth Debski and Annie
Harris. The petition was continued to a Special Meeting on Tuesday, February 12, 2007.
The petitioner, National Grid Wireless, sought a Variance from side/rear setback to construct
a one-story structure for the property located at 134-142 Canal Street, Salem, in the
Industrial (I) zoning district.
The Board of Appeals, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the public
hearing, and after thorough review of the Petition submitted, makes the following
findings of fact:
1. The petitioner was represented by Joseph Cotrenti of Serafini, Serafini,
Darling and Correnti and Tom Wahl, Project Manager for National Grid
Wireless.
2. Petitioner's property presently consists of an existing ten (10) foot by twelve
(12) foot fiber optic cable regeneration facility, which is to be replaced.
3. The subject property is within the Industrial (I) zoning district.
4. The petitioner is requesting variances from side/rear setback to construct a
new 1,200 sq.ft. regeneration structure to be made of sectional concrete with a
reddish/brown brick exterior. The building would be remotely monitored 24-
hours a day, seven (7) days a week and would be periodically visited by
customers performing routine maintenance tasks on fiber optic cable
equipment.
5. The requested relief would allow construction to be approximately eight (8)
feet from the Canal St. lot line , instead of the required thirty (30) feet.
r
6. The applicant stated that the proposed reconstruction has the support of the
property owner and of abutting business owners.
7. At the Public Hearing on January 171h, 2007 Ward Three Councilor Jean
Pelletier stated that the abutting property owners had not been notified.
8. It was found at the January 17`h meeting that the applicant had listed an
incorrect address on their application resulting in inadequate notification
being sent out to parcel abutters.
9. The petition was continued to a Special Meeting on Tuesday, February 121h,
2007 at 6:30 pm.
10. Prior to the Special Meeting on February 12"i, 2007, a supplemental notice
was sent out to abutters, using the correct parcel address..
11. The Public Hearing was re-opened on Tuesday, February 12`h, 2007 at 6:30
pm.
12. The petitioner stated that the building noise from Air Conditioning and
Generator units would be approximately 70 db.
On the basis of the above findings of fact, including all evidence presented at the public
hearing, including, but not limited to, the Petition the Zoning Board of Appeals concludes
as follows:
1. The petitioner's request to for a Variance does not constitute substantial
detriment to the public good as the construction of a new, enclosed building
would not significantly impact the abutters to the site.
2. The requested relief does not nullify or substantially derogate from the intent
or purpose of the zoning ordinance as the use was a pre-existing use and is
permitted in the Industrial District.
3. A literal enforcement of the zoning ordinance would create a substantial
hardship to the petitioner as the structure would have to be relocated closer to
the other buildings on the site, decreasing the amount of parking availability
for the entire site.
4. In permitting such change, the Board of Appeals requires certain appropriate
conditions and safeguards as noted below.
In consideration of the above, the Salem Board of Appeals voted, five (5) in favor
(Cohen, Dionne, Pinto, Debski, Harris) and none (0) opposed, to grant the request for a
Variance, subject to the following terms, conditions, and safeguards:
n
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. A certificate of Inspection is to be obtained.
A
Nina Cohen
Salem 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 that
20 days have elapsed and no appeal has been filed,or that,if such appeal has been filed,that it has been
dismissed or denied and is recorded in the South Essex Registry of Deeds and indexed under the name of
the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owner's Certificate of Title.