boa_57_endicott_street_-_stamped_decision 4.27.2020 '.7` ,:���:, CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS
1i1i1i °s' s BOARD OF APPEALS
98 WASHINGTON STREET SALEM,MAssAcHusETTs 01970
1l1MBERLEY DRISCOLL 'ftL:978-619-5685
MAYOR
April 27,2020
Decision
City of Salem Board of Appeals r---.j ':0
� ry
Petition of LEN KARAN for a special permit per Section 3-3.5 Nonconforming Single To-
FamLl rResidential Structures of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to expand a nonconfo tw!V
family home by adding a second story deck within required rear and side yard setbac 7
ENDICOTT STREET (Map 25,Lot 518) (R.2 Zoning District). to
tr
A public hearing on the above Petition was opened on April 1,2020 pursuant to M.G.L Ch.40A,§ 11 and
closed on that date with the following Salem Board of Appeals members present:Peter A. Copelas,Mike
Duffy(Chair), Carly McClain,Rosa Ordaz,Steven Smalley,and Paul Viccica.Board member Jimmy Tsitsinos
was absent.
The petitioner seeks a special permit per Section 3.3.5 Nonconforming Single-and Two-Family Residential Structures
of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to expand a nonconforming two-family home by adding a second story deck
within required rear and side yard setbacks.
Statements of Fact:
1. In the petition date-stamped February 26,2020,the petitioner requested a special permit per Section
3.3.5 Nonconforming Single-and Two-Family Residential Strictures of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to
expand a nonconforming two-family home by adding a second story deck within required rear and
side yard setbacks.
2. 57 Endicott Street is a two-family home in the Residential Two-Family(R2) zoning district.The two-
family residential use is allowed in the R2 district.
3. The property is nonconforming to minimum lot area,minimum lot area per dwelling unit,front yard
setback,and both side yard setbacks.
4. The proposal is to add a six(6) foot deep by eighteen and one-tenth foot(18.1)wide second story
deck.As noted on the application form,the deck"would project into the rear yard setback 3'-3"and
eastern side yard setback approximately 1'-0".In effect the side yard setback would be 9'0"and the
rear setback 26'0"."The plot plan submitted with the application shows that the deck would be 9.6'
from the east side lot line and 26.9'from the rear lot line.
5. The deck would not extend further into the side yard setback than the existing building does. It
would,however,create a new nonconformity in terms of rear yard setback,failing the 30'rear yard
setback requirement of the R2 zoning district.
6. The requested relief,if granted,would allow the petitioner to expand a nonconforming two-family
home by adding a second story deck within required rear and side yard setbacks.
Page 1 of 3
City of Salem Board of Appeals
April 27,2020
Project 57 Endicott Street
Page 2 of 3
7. The April 1,2020 meeting of the Board of Appeals was held remotely,via the online platform Zoom.
8. At the April 1,2020 meeting of the Board of Appeals,petitioner Len Karan discussed the petition.He
explained the plan to renovate the existing two-family home into two high-end condos.They are
looking to add a deck to the second floor to encourage indoor-outdoor space,increase the vibrancy of
the neighborhood,and encourage socialization between neighbors. He noted that there will be only
minor infringements of the required setbacks:9.6 feet instead of 10 feet on the side (not the driveway
side),and 26.9 feet instead of 30 in the rear yard.He stated the deck will not block light or air or
otherwise be detrimental to the neighborhood or neighbors.The backyard will remain available for
both units to use.
9. At the April 1,2020 public hearing,the Board discussed the proposal.Peter Copelas asked whether
the two units are side by side or stacked vertically.Mr. Karan stated they are vertically stacked.Peter
Copelas asked whether the deck will be exclusive to the second-floor unit.Mr. Karan responded in
the affirmative:the second-floor deck would serve only the second-floor unit,and the first floor will
have a patio area. Mr. Karan presented the designs and noted the house will have the same profile and
general concept as just about every other building on that street and in that neighborhood.
10. At the April 1,2020 public hearing,no (0) members of the public spoke in favor of or in opposition
to the petition.
11. At the April 1,2020 public hearing,Chair Duffy reviewed the special permit criteria,noting that the
applicant provided a Statement of Grounds addressing the criteria. Chair Duffy added that the
proposal is not substantially more detrimental than the existing use to the neighborhood.He stated
that while the porch slightly infringes on the side yard setback,it infringes less than the building itself
does;the porch infringes relatively minimally on the rear yard setback.
The Salem Board of Appeals, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the public hearing,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 proposed nonconforming structure is not substantially more detrimental than the
existing nonconforming structure to the neighborhood.
1. Social,economic, or community needs served by the proposal:The original structure is built flat style
and the second floor unit does not have any direct access to usable exterior space.The special permit
would allow for the petitioner to create an outdoor space for the second unit and make a more desirable
unit with amenities consistent with other properties in the neighborhood and community.
2. Traffic flow and safety,including parking and loading:The proposed deck will have no effect on traffic
load or parking.Occupant load of the dwelling is not expected to change and the off-street parking spot
will remain.
3. Adequacy of utilities and other public services:A two family dwelling is being renovated.No additional
loads on utilities are anticipated as total occupant load is anticipated to be less than or equal to the
existing two family.
4. Impacts on the natural environment, including drainage: The deck is permeable and will not affect
rainwater drainage.
5. Neighborhood character:The deck is unroofed and thus of lower profile.It is likely to encourage leisure
activity at the rear of the house and thus stimulate interaction with neighbors.
City of Salem Board of Appeals
April 27,2020
Project:57 Endicott Street
Page 3 of 3
6. Potential fiscal impact, including impact on City tax base and employment: Each of the renovated
apartments can provide a home for a young family. Attractive urban living, in the vicinity of local
employment opportunities and mass transit,will support the local vendors and shops and increase the
tax base.
On the basis of the above statements of fact and findings,the Salem Board of Appeals voted five (5) in favor
(Paul Vcdca, Mike Duffy (Chair), Rosa Ordaz, Carly McClain, and Peter Copelas) and none (0) opposed to
grant the requested Special Permit per Section 3.3.5 Nonconforming Single-and Two Family Residential Structures of
the Salem Zoning Ordinance to expand a nonconforming two-family home by adding a second story deck
within required rear and side yard setbacks at 57 Endicott 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.
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.
S. 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 Duffy,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.
City of Salem
In the year Two Thousand and Twenty
An Ordinance to amend an ordinance relative to Traffic
Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Sakm,as follows:
Section I. Section 88—Speed Zone Regulations of Article VIII be amended by repealing the following.
Valley Street—eastbound,beginning at the junction of Gallows Hill Road,thence easterly 0.15
miles at twenty-five(25)miles per hour,0.18 miles at thirty-five(35)miles per hour,0.18 miles at
twenty-five(25)miles per hour,ending at the junction of Route 107,Highland Avenue;the total
distance being 0.51 miles.(2/25/76 DPW 1019)
And replacing it with:
Valley Street—eastbound,beginning at the junction of Gallows Hill Road,thence easterly 0.15
miles at twenty-five(25)miles per hour,0.18 miles at thirty-five(30)miles per hoar,0.18 miles at
twenty-five(25)miles per hour,ending at the junction of Route 107,Highland Avenue;the total
distance being 0.51 miles.(2/25/76 DPW 1019)
Section 2. Section 88—Speed Zone Regulations of Article VIII be further amended by repealing the
following:
Valley Street—west bound,beginning at the junction of Highland Avenue,Route 107,thence
westerly,0.18 miles at twenty-five(25)miles per hour,0.18 miles at thirty-five(35)miles per hour,
0.15 miles at twenty-five(25)miles per hour,ending at the junction of Gallows Hill Road;the total
distance being 0.51 miles.(2/25/75 DPW 1019)
And replacing it with:
Valley Street—west bound,beginning at the junction of Highland Avenue,Route 107,thence
westerly,0.18 miles at twenty-five(25)miles per hour,0.18 miles at thirty-five(30)miles per hour,
0.15 miles at twenty-five(25)miles per hour,ending at the junction of Gallows Hill Road;the total
distance being 0.51 miles.(2/25/75 DPW 1019)
Section 3. This Ordinance shall take effect as provided by City Charter.
In City Council March 26,2020
Adopted for first passage
In City Council April 9, 2020
Adopted for second anddfinal passage
Approved by the Mayor on April 14, 2020
.�,Urrl o�JS
ATTEST: ILENE SIMONS
CITY CLERK
i