9 Buffum St Decision (STAMPED) F CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS
q BOARD OF APPEALS
98 WASHINGTON STREET♦ SALEM,MASSACHu=rs 01970 r
'ILL:978-619-5685 V
KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL > "
MAYOR f ri
'C 1
December 16, 2021
Decision n
City of Salem Board of Appeals
The petition of VALERINA CONDOR, LLC for 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 expanding the third story from
a gable to mansard roof at 9 BUFFUM STREET(Map 26,Lot 318) (R2 Zoning District)
A public hearing on the above Petition was opened on August 18,2021,it was continued to
September 22,2021 and continued again to October 20,2021. It was then continued to November
17,2021. The public hearing was closed on November 17,2021
On November 17, 2021, the following members of the Salem Board of Appeals were present:
Peter Copelas (Vice Chair),Paul Viccica, Carly McClain,Rosa Ordaz and Steven Smalley
The petitioner seeks a special permit per Section 3.3.5 Nonconforming Single- and Two Family
Residential Stracturn of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to expand a nonconforming two-family home
by expanding the third story from a gable to mansard roof.
Statements of Fact:
1. The petition is date stamped July 28, 2021. The petitioner has requested a special permit
per Section 3.3.5 Nonconforming Single-and Two-Family Residential Structures of the Salem
Zoning Ordinance to expand an existing nonconforming two-family home by the third
story from a gable to a mansard roof. The Petitioner also proposes an infill addition to
the side porch area,which does not require zoning relief.
2. 9 Buffum Street is owned by the Petitioner,Valerina Condor,LLC.
3. The Petitioner is represented by Attorney Kristin E. Kolick of Correnti&Darling LLP.
4. 9 Buffum Street is in the R2 Residential Two-Family zone. It is currently used as a two-
family dwelling and will remain a two-family dwelling after the proposed renovation.
5. The existing 3-story building conforms with the maximum building height (feet),but it is
nonconforming with the maximum building height (stories).
6. The requested relief,if granted,would allow the petitioner to expand the roof of the
two-family structure from a gable to mansard roof.
7. On August 18,2021,Attorney Kristin Kolick,appeared before the Board on a request
for a continuance due to some issues arising with the property and the Petitioner
wanting some time to address these issues.
8. On August 18,2021,public comment was opened to speak to the continuance. Paul
Mandeville, 7 Buffum Street, spoke to construction material from 9 Buffum Street next
to his window and stated that he cannot open the window due to the proximity of the
material. Chair Duffy expressed that in the meantime that Mr. Mandeville could speak
to the building or planning department for his concerns until the Petition is heard at an
upcoming meeting.
9. On August 18,2021,another public comment addressing the continuance was given by
Stacee Hernandez, 13 Buffum Street. She inquired about there being a work stop order
for 9 Buffum Street. She stated that she has witnessed dangerous things happening on
the street. Chair Duffy expressed that he was not aware of any work stoppage
happening at 9 Buffum Street. Ms. Hernandez wanted to be clear about whether they
were still able to work. Chair Duffy stated that unless they were under a work-stop
order,that work could continue.
10. Building Commissioner,Thomas St. Pierre, addressed the public comment that there
was a work stoppage order at 9 Buffiun Street.
11. The board voted unanimously to continue the petition to the September 22,2021,
meeting.
12. On September 22,2021,Attorney Kristin Kolick appeared before the Board on a
request to continue and stated that the Petitioner had just received more feedback from
abutters and wanted to take some time to reevaluate plans based on abutter's feedback.
13. The board voted unanimously to continue the Petition to the October 20,2021,
meeting.
14. On October 20,2021,Attorney Kristen Kolick appeared before the Board on a request
to continue and stated that Petitioner would like to continue to November 17,2021,
when there will be a full board present. There were only four members present for
October 20, 2021. The board voted unanimously to allow the continuance to the
November 17,2021 meeting.
15. On November 17,2021,Attorney Kristen Kolick presented the Petition for 9 Buffiun
Street to the Board.Attorney Kolick explained that since the original plans were filed,
the Petitioner scaled back the proposed renovations to add dormers to the existing gable
style roof,rather than replacing it with a mansard roof. Project architect Ryan McShera
and Marc Tranos of Valerina Condor LLC also explained the changes to the proposed
building design. Attorney Kolick clarified for the record that the property will remain a
two-family dwelling and that there is no plan for a four (4) unit building.
16. The Building Commissioner,Thomas St. Pierre, also clarified for the public record that
there will only be two (2) units and there have never been plans for a four (4)unit
dwelling. He stated that these were rumors due to the issues between petitioner and
abutters.
17. Public comments were opened. Paul Mandeville, 7 Buffum Street, expressed that the
new construction would put the property outside of the side setback requirements for
the property. Mr. Mandeville expressed his concerns about taking out a 200-year-old
pine tree that would increase light pollution, as well as the Petitioner's cars going down
the driveway and causing disruption in his kitchen. He stated that the hazardous debris
in the yard was still in the yard and making it dangerous for his young relatives to play
outside.
2
18. Brendan Kelley, 11 Buffum Street,expressed opposition to the petition. His concern
was that this permit would allow a non-conforming property to be more non-
conforming, especially concerning the roof construction. The roof line would change
the character of the neighborhood. He brought up the asbestos issue in the yard as well.
19. Brendan Kelley also stated that there had been challenges between the Petitioner and the
abutters that were not worked out and caused a strain within the neighborhood.
20. Vice Chair,Peter Copelas read two (2) public comments that had been submitted online
for the public record.
21. Attorney Kolick and the Petitioner explained that changes were made to the plans in
response to feed back from the neighbors to address their concerns.
22. Due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and related precautions and Governor Baker's
March 12,2020 Order Suspending Certain Provisions of the Open Meeting Law, G.L. c.
30A, §18,and the Governor's March 15,2020 Order imposing strict limitations on the
number of people that may gather in one place, the November 17,2021 meeting of the
Board of Appeals was held remotely,via the online platform.
Special Permit Findings:
The Board finds that the proposed modifications will be substantially more detrimental than the
existing nonconforming structure to the neighborhood:
1. Social, economic, or community needs: The board found that the needs were not
served by this proposal.
2. Traffic flow and safety,including parking and loading. Some impact will be expected.
3. Adequate utilities and other public services already service the structure.
4. Impacts on the natural environment,including drainage:No negative impact would be
expected.
5. Neighborhood character: The project is not in keeping with the neighborhood
character.
6. Potential fiscal impact,including impact on City tax base and employment. The board
finds minimal evidence of positive fiscal impacts.
On the basis of the above statements of fact and findings, the Salem Board of Appeals voted
Three (3) in favor (Paul Viccica, Steven Smalley, Peter Copelas(Vice Chair)) and two (2) (Carly
McClain, Rosa Ordaz) opposed to grant Valerina Condor, LLC a special permit per Section
3.3.5 Nonconforming Single- and Two-Family residential Structures of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to
expand an existing nonconforming 3-family building at 9 Buffum Street by expanding the roof .
Failing to receive four votes in favor, the petition for a special permit is denied.
3
r
Mike Duffy, Ch
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.
4