boa_11_rice_street_-_stamped_decision_0 10.30.2019 ` CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF APPEALS
o
98 WAS]IINGTON STREET♦ SALEM,MASSA0JUSI ITS 01970 Cl)
KiMBERLLY Dluscou. TEL:978-619-5685 r— ---t
MAYOR M-< co
October 30, 2019 v�
Decision Cn W;K W
City of Salem Board of Appeals 00
Petition of PAMELA J. BARTON for a special permit per Section 3.3.5 Nonconforming Single-and
Two-Family Residential Structures of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to enlarge an existing two-family
structure by adding one additional story to the existing 2.5-story building,removing a side addition,
and adding several exterior stairways and porches at 11 RICE STREET (Map 36, Lot 197) (R2
Zoning District).
A public hearing on the above Petition was opened on August 21,2019 pursuant to M.G.L Ch. 40A, § 11. No
testimony was heard during the August 21,2019 hearing. The petition was continued to September 18,2019
and October 16,2019, and closed on October 16,2019 with the following Salem Board of Appeals members
present: Peter A. Copelas,Mike Duff T (Chair), Jimmi Heiserman, Jimmy Tsitsinos,and Paul Viccica.At the
August 21,2019 meeting,only Mike Duffy (Chair),Jim ni Heiserman, and Paul Viccica were in attendance,
and no testimony was heard; this is discussed in the Statements of Fact below. At the September 18,2019
meeting,Peter Copelas,Mike Duffy (Chair),Jimini Heiserman, Rosa Ordaz,and Paul Viccica were in
attendance;Jimmy Tsitsinos was absent.
The petitioner seeks a special permit per Section 3.3.5 Nonconfonning Single- and Tivo-Family Residential Structure
of the Salem Zoning Ordinance.
Statements of Fact:
1. In the petition date-stamped July 30,2019, the petitioner requested a special permit per Section 3.3.5
Nonconforming Single-and Tim-Family Residential Structures of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to enlarge the
existing two-family structure at 11 Rice Street to reconfigure and improve the two dwelling units by
removing a side addition and adding a third-floor addition and several exterior stairways and porches.
2. Attorney William Quinn,representing petitioner Pamela J. Barton,presented the petition.
3. The property is a two-family home in the Residential Two-Family (R2) zoning district.
4. With the existing structure, the property is nonconforming to at least minimum lot area,minimum lot
area per dwelling unit, lot frontage,lot width,lot coverage,depth of front yard,width of side yard
(both sides), and depth of rear yard.
5. The proposal is to add one story to the existing building,remove an existing side addition, and add
several exterior stairways and porches.
6. The existing building is 2.5 stories in height. The maximum height of buildings (stories) allowed in the
R2 zoning district is 2.5 stories. The maximum height(feet) is 35 feet. Under this proposal, the height
will exceed the allowed number of stories,but will not exceed 35 feet.
7. Under the proposal, the nonconformities to front and rear yard setback and lot coverage will also be
increased.
t
City of Salem Board of Appeals
October 30,2019
Project: 11 Rice Street
Page 2 of 4
8. The requested relief,if granted,would allow the petitioner to add one story to the existing building,
remove an existing side addition,and add several exterior stairways and porches at 11 Rice Street.
9. At the August 21,2019 meeting of the Board of Appeals,only three Board members were in
attendance: Mike Duffy(Chair),Jimmi Heiserman,and Paul Viccica. Having three members in
attendance out of the five-member Board constitutes a quorum (enough members to hold a meeting).
However,per the Zoning Board of Appeals'Rules and Regulations, "[t]he concurring vote of at least
four(4) members of the Zoning Board of Appeals shall be necessary in any action taken by the
Board."As such, the Board could not vote to approve any petitions in the August 21 meeting.
Petitioners were informed of this attendance situation in advance and were given the opportunity to
submit requests to continue their petitions to the next regularly scheduled meeting on September 18,
2019. In an email to Planner Brennan Corriston dated August 20,2019,Attorney William Quinn,
representing the petitioner, submitted a request to continue 11 Rice Street to the September 18
meeting.This request was duly filed with the City Clerk on August 21,2019. In the meeting,the
Board voted three (3) in favor aimmi Heiserman,Paul Viccica,and Mike Duffy (Chair)) and none (0)
opposed to approve the motion to continue to the next regularly scheduled meeting,September 18,
2019.
10. At the September 18,2019 meeting of the Board of Appeals,Attorney William Quinn discussed the
proposal.Attorney Quinn noted that the property is somewhat out-of-repair.Attorney Quinn and the
property owner,Pamela J. "Joy"Barton, discussed the plans for the project.Attorney Quinn showed
photos of 4 Rice Street,which is very similar to the proposal for 11 Rice Street. The Board asked
about the "bump-out"in the front of the building. Ms. Barton noted that only the second and third
floors bump out,with 24 inches of clearance at the second floor and 12 inches of clearance at the
sidewalk. Paul Viccica asked about the side deck. Ms. Barton stated that this was a means of egress.
Mr. Viccica stated that he saw the deck as unsightly and as a detriment to the neighbor.
11. At the September 18,2019 public hearing, one (1) member of the public spoke in favor of the petition
and no (0) members of the public spoke in opposition.
12. At the September 18, 2019 meeting, there was discussion of the means of egress and whether the side
deck was legally serving as a means of egress. Chair Duffy noted that it may be useful to have some
further discussion from the architect about the purpose of the side deck other than as living space.
Mr. Viccica suggested continuing the project and seeing if the architect can discuss it. Ms. Barton
requested a continuance and stated that she would bring in her neighbor as well.
13. At the September 18,2019 meeting, the Board voted five (5)in favor (Mike Duffy (Chair),Peter
Copelas,Rosa Ordaz,Paul Viccica,and Jimmy Heiserman) and none (0) opposed to approve the
motion to continue to the next regularly scheduled meeting, October 16,2019.
14. Prior to the October meeting, the petitioner submitted revised elevations. These were dated October
2, 2019.
15. Board member Jimmy Tsitsinos,who was absent at the September 18, 2019 hearing on this petition,
signed an affidavit of service on October 16, 2019, certifying that he examined all evidence pertaining
to 11 Rice Street which was distributed at the single missed session on September 18, 2019, which
evidence included an audio recording of the missed session. He submitted this certification prior to
participating in the vote on this matter in the October 16,2019 public hearing.
16. At the October 16,2019 meeting of the Board of Appeals,Attorney Scott Grover(of the same law
firm as Attorney William Quinn,Tinti,Quinn, Grover&Frey),representing the petitioner, discussed
the project.The architect,Bernardo Jose,was also in attendance.Attorney Grover explained the
changes made from the initial plans,stating that the initially proposed porch along the side of the
City of Salem Board of Appeals
October 30,2019
Project: 11 Rice Street
Page 3 of 4
property has been removed,and that there is now a porch with egress to the ground from the second
floor.Attorney Grover also noted that the front section has been revised to better match
neighborhood character. Mr. Copelas asked if the only material change was the elimination of the side
porch.Attorney Grover stated that the access points were changed slightly. Mr. St. Pierre noted the
change in the facade including the bay window.Attorney Grover stated that this change (from the
previously proposed cantilevered projection) is now in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood.
Mr. St. Pierre commented positively on the petitioner's efforts,including the drawing and before and
after images.
17. At the October 16,2019 public hearing,no (0) members of the public spoke in favor of or opposition
to the petition.
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, and the Petitioner's
presentation and public testimony,makes the following findings:
Special Permit Findings:
The Board finds that the proposed nonconfortning structure is not substantially more detrimental than the
existing nonconforming structure to the neighborhood.
1. Social, economic and community needs are served by the proposal. This proposal will take a building
that is not in productive use and restore the property to two habitable units, serving a community
need.
2. There will be no in impact on traffic flow and safety,including parking and loading.
3. Adequacy of utilities and other public services: Adequate utilities and public services service the
property.
4. Impacts on the natural environment, including drainage: Environmental impact will be improved by
the restoration of this building,which is currently in disrepair.
5. Neighborhood character: The restoration of a building in a serious state of disrepair will positively
impact neighborhood character.
6. Potential fiscal impact, including impact on City tax base and employment: The rehabilitation of the
property will have a positive fiscal impact.
On the basis of the above statements of fact and findings, the Salem Board of Appeals voted five (5) in favor
Uimmi Heiserman,Mike Duffy (Chair),Peter Copelas,Jimmy Tsitsinos,and Paul Viccica) and none (0)
opposed to grant the requested special permit per Section 3.3.5 Noncos forming Single-and Tzvo-Family Residential
Stn taures of the Salem Zoning to enlarge an existing two-family structure by adding one additional story to the
existing 2.5-story building,removing a side addition,and adding several exterior stairways and porches at 11
Rice Street, 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.
1
City of Salem Board of Appeals
October 30,2019
Project: 11 Rice Street
Page 4 of 4
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. All construction shall be done per the plans and dimensions submitted to and approved by this Board.
No change,extension,material corrections,additions,substitutions,alterations,and/or modification
to an approval by this Board shall be permitted without the approval of this Board,unless such
change has been deemed a minor field change by the Building Commissioner in consultation with the
Chair of the Board of Appeals.
Mike Duff,, . air
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.
r