City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
Minutes of Meeting
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
A meeting of the Salem Zoning Board of Appeals (“Salem ZBA”) was held on Wednesday, July 16, 2008 in the third floor conference room at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts at 6:30 p.m.
Those present were: Robin Stein (Chair), Rick Dionne, Annie Harris, Rebecca Curran, Bonnie Belair (Alternate). Also present were: Amy Lash, Staff Planner and Thomas St. Pierre Building Commissioner
1. Approval of Minutes - June 18, 2008
Harris made a motion to approve the minutes of June 18, 2008, seconded by Stein and approved (5-0).
2. CONTINUED: ~Petition of AAA ENTERPRISES & SERVICES on behalf of MOUNTAIN REALTY TRUST requesting a Special Permit to add a nonconforming use to allow for the receipt and processing of stone, soil, and loam at 15 ROBINSON ROAD (BPD). –Request for continuance to September 17, 2008
Dionne made a motion to continue the petition of AAA Enterprises & Services to September 17, 2008, seconded by Curran and approved (5-0).
3. Petition of ALBERT MASONE seeking a Variance from number of stories allowed (2 1/2) to add three front dormers and one rear shed dormer to the existing third story at 99 Essex Street (R-2)
Victoria Mario presented the petition. She introduced her fiancé Albert Masone. Mario said she and Masone have been working on a renovation together. They plan to occupy the 2nd and 3rd floor of the property once the renovations are complete.
The public portion of the hearing was opened and closed with no comments.
Curran asked if it is currently a two family. Mario said yes and it will continue to be a two family. Curran asked if they are proposing three dormers in the front. Mario said yes, and an additional shed dormer in the back.
Harris asked how much usable square footage is being created. Mason said the building is roughly 30’ x 20’. They bought the property as an investment, but now intend to owner occupy and have a family there. They will be restoring the wood siding and painting it a color more appropriate for the neighborhood. They plan to add new trim and details, replace the shingles on the roof, and take off the aluminum siding. Harris said the renovations would be an improvement.
Rebecca made a motion to approve the request for variances subject to nine (9) standard conditions, and two (2) special conditions that it remain a two family, and that the exterior finish be changed to wood clapboard. The motion was seconded by Rick Dionne and approved (5-0).
4. Petition of SALEM POINT RENTAL PROPERTIES, CORP. requesting to amend the decision dated July 14, 2004 to remove all references and requirements that any units be owner-occupied, and allow use of all units as either rental or ownership units at 50 Palmer Street (B-1).
Attorney Bill Quinn addressed the board. He said he was before the Board in 2004 and at that time the intention was to have home ownership, which everyone was very excited about. Quinn introduced Bill Whelan from the Salem Harbor Community Development Corporation (CDC). Quinn said the marketing efforts to sell the units have failed and due to national trends in the real estate market they are now in default on the construction load. They don’t want this project to go into foreclosure and for somebody else to take it over. Quinn said the CDC has a great track record and as an exit plan to avoid foreclosure they are seeking to amend the decision to allow the property to be used for rental or homeownership. Quinn said they believe it will likely be rental.
Whelan said there has been a national housing crisis. Whelan said news came out in December and many urban areas are in the same situation. Whelan said the unique product they have is a deed restricted property which is quality construction. Now there are other opportunities in the first time homebuyer market; it has been reported that declining values are not going to change until 2009. Whelan said the CDC had only had one application for the lottery, as well as another incomplete application. He said the lenders were concerned by this, though the CDC made a strong case that they could make this work. The CDC redid the marketing plan and advertising and had open houses; the outreach generated activity but no sales. They met with lenders to study the pricing; the price points determined would have
created a $600,000 gap. Investors asked the CDC to start looking at rental alternatives. They have verbal confirmation from the State that tax credits will be awarded for rentals. Whelan said the timing for the project could not have been worse. Whelan said they engaged the partners as soon as possible but have been left with one option. They need a viable exit strategy and a way to preserve the affordable housing. Whelan said there has been a dramatic face-lift in that corner and the property would be controlled by the CDC who will maintain a stake in the neighborhood. Whelan said the CDC monitors the incomes and situations of those who rent the properties.
Dionne asked whether the lenders were willing to do a rent to own option. Whelan said yes, though they cannot carry that debt and need to pay off the construction loan. The rent to own option essentially asked the construction loaner to stay in as a permanent lender. The North Shore Home Consortium and the City of Salem has passed through HUD money, though there is not enough money to close the gap. The state agreed to allocate $270,000 worth of tax credits which over fifteen years could be worth 1.7 million plus.
Belair asked how many units there are total. Whelan said fifteen (15) units. Belair asked what criteria will be used in determining who will rent. Whelan said income levels are based on levels determined by HUD, 60% of area median income is the high end and there will be two units for those who are very low income (30% or less of area median income).
Curran asked what price the units were on the market for? Whelan said $142,500, $189,900, and $169,999.
Belair asked if they were finished. Whelan said yes, CO’s were issued in January.
John Borris (2 Bedford Street, Chairman of the Salem Housing Authority) said the Authority is supportive and thinks the rentals will go quickly since their phone is ringing off the hook.
John Shaw (108 Congress Street) said he owns the only single family home on the street and there is a lot of rental. He feels the owner occupied part of the project was essential to improving the neighborhood. He said he wasn’t sure what was being done to sell the units and thinks it would help if the trash and construction debris were cleaned up.
Jean Martin (24 Leavitt Street) said she owns on Leavitt and Park Streets and has been a long-term advocate in the point. She thinks the tenants across the street need to be controlled. She said those who go down and look at the CDC units say this neighborhood is not for me. She said allowing for rentals would be bailing out a special interest group who made promises to the community.
Nancy Moore bought a property on Prince Street in 2005. She said she has put a lot of money into the building, made the units nice, and cleaned up the neighborhood. She thought it was a great project and wanted the homeownership. She had somebody tonight come to look at one of her units and after seeing the neighborhood the person said the neighborhood was not for them.
Lucy Corchardo (38 Committee Street) was a strong advocate for the project from day one, and was hopeful they could get rid of blight. Though the market was bad, everyone had faith that that the project should be continued forward. She said other than a couple of open houses on Sundays, not much was being done to sell the units. Corchardo said she was a perspective owner and the sole applicant of the lottery, but now can’t rent because of the guidelines. She said some issues in the neighborhood come from the properties this developer owns. She said this project needs to be home ownership and not rental and the funds from the City could have been used to lower the rates of some units. Corchardo said she thinks turning this project into rental units will not help the neighborhood at all.
Corchardo submitted a petition of with seventy signatures of those opposed.
Ward 3 Councilor Jean Pelletier said he was at the earlier meetings and knows the area needs homeownership. He agrees Corchardo and thinks more marketing can be done.
Quinn said that they are up against many obstacles with the lenders and state regulations. They would be happy to meet with people if the Board wants to put this off for a few weeks; he understands they are in a tough position. Whelan said he spoke to several realtors who wouldn’t touch it because they are not familiar with the deed restriction. Whelan said they were following a marketing plan from January to today and with current pricing the units are not going to move. Belair said she thinks the CDC missed the boat but not having somebody on board to assist market the properties. Belair asked how long the properties were on the market. Whelan said the lottery started in October and the CDC rewrote the marketing plan at that time. They used MLS and other internet sites, they accessed several email
lists, and they tried to have open houses to engage the realtors.
Belair said October to March is not height of the market season, right now is. Belair said after hearing the comments from the neighborhood she would like to see the CDC get some sort of extension and actively market the properties for the next three months. Belair said she is sympathetic to the plight and wants to help but she don’t feel all the possible resources have been used.
Dionne said he agrees with Belair; he can’t believe the Tompkins building had twenty units that sold in six-months. Whelan said that’s a different product, different location, different price point
Harris asked if they looked into lifting the deed restrictions. Quinn said they do not want to loose the affordability. Curran asked if the deed restrictions were for 50 years. Whelan said, yes. Curran asked if they had to remain owner occupied, and the units didn’t sell and the project went into foreclosure -what would happen at that point? Whelan said the deed restrictions would go away. Quinn said the restrictions would extinguish upon a foreclosure, otherwise they would remain for 50 years. Harris said foreclosure may extinguish a lot of the problems. Quinn said it is hard to envision a more positive impact if a person from out of town comes in and purchases it at a cheap price then there is no oversight over the project.
Stein is disappointed to see an environment where these units haven’t been sold. She is not surprised to hear that brokers weren’t interested in investing the time to sell these units. Stein suggested requesting continuance. Stein noted the original petition only called for nine units of home ownership. Quinn said the professionals say that won’t pay off construction. Stein said the CDC is holding a property for far longer than they want to, though most people are in the same situation in this market. Stein thinks foreclosure would be worse for the neighborhood. Stein suggested that maybe some people in the audience have suggestions on marketing.
Pelletier said hypothetically if the bank takes this over, the decision would transfer to a new developer. Stein said typically foreclosure wipes out the restrictions, though she will check with the City Solicitor on this.
Harris said people don’t want to buy units with deed restrictions, that is the problem. Whelan said they have tried to sell units and have continually reduced prices Quinn said if there is no restriction, there could be a lot of speculation about what’s going to happen. There will be a desire to flip the units for money. Dionne asked wasn’t this project started for profit. Quinn said to cover overhead and development costs but it is a non-profit corporation that has no place to put profit
Borris suggested considering a compromise for the next meeting. Stein said it was always going to have six (6) rental units. Quinn said they applied the way they have to have options.
Dionne asked why the rental units have not been rented. Whelan said the rental units were to be part of the homeownership units so the homeowners would rent them.
John Borris (5 Bedford Street) asked would there be on-site building ownership if it went to rental? Whelan said they should have a conversation about that. They are already in the neighborhood with maintenance staff and they want to hear about the issues there may be.
Eddie Telemaco (PO BOX 8032, Salem) said he is the clerk for Salem CDC has been on the Board for 6 years. Telemaco said they have had all the same questions at their meetings. They had to re-engineer the project because the cost of construction increased. Telemaco said it is very frustrating to deliver a product of 15 units completed, open the doors for home ownership and have one applicant. Telemaco said you can blame the marketing plan, but the real estate market it just not the same. Telemaco e said you can’t blame an individual organization from what’s happening in this neighborhood. Telemaco said the CDC stuck their neck out to provide 15 homeownership opportunities. It is an extreme value, though location and timing is what is happening. The CDC has done everything they can. He said he has been a critic of the marketing plan himself, and think the marketing has been everywhere.
Harris asked, so are there renters in the neighborhood not able to buy, not even your tenants? Stein said she thinks it’s telling that there are 70 against rentals, but none of them wanted to buy?
Domingo Dominguez said he was the former Vice President of the CDC. He thinks nobody will buy the property if the CDC doesn’t work with the community. If you ask people about the CDC, they will say they don’t see the CDC around.
Jean Martin (24 Leavitt Street) said she’s been at every one of these meetings. When she saw the price of the units she was astonished. This is for moderate-income not low-income. She said you can buy a 3 family for 100,000 per unit.
Yoleny Ynoa (85 Congress Street) is the Vice President of Point Neighborhood Association. He supported the project because it was supposed to be for first time homebuyers. He said everything is changing but we don’t know why. The CDC is a corporation that supposedly works with the community- at one time they did, but now the CDC is disconnected with the community. Ynoa said pople are interested, but they are not receiving the information.
Nancy Moore said if the CDC rents this property, they would have brand new units. What about us with vacant units, will we go into foreclosure? Are we going to section off the poor? People are going to be angry. We didn’t need 15 more units, we needed 15 homeowners with pride. She said we don’t need competition for our units, which are already difficult to rent.
Stein said she believes there has been an issue with communication from the community’s perspective.
Quinn requested that the Board continue the matter until August. Curran made a motion to continue the meeting to the next meeting which was rescheduled to August 27th. The motion was seconded by Stein and approved (5-0).
5. Petition submitted of SUSAN MACFARLANE seeking a special permit for a home occupation to allow for a massage therapy business at 110 Bay View Avenue (R-1).
Attorney Joseph Correnti addressed the Board and introduced Susan MacFarlane and her husband. Correnti said this is a request to allow MacFarlane, a licensed massage therapist, to dedicate one room in her home to conduct that business in her home. It would have no employees and meet the technical guidelines of section 5-3. This will be low density, on an average day this would generate zero to four clients per day. It wouldn’t be everyday. Correnti said MacFarlane would dedicate some parking to this too, she has 3 spaces side by side. Two spaces are for her use and one is for her tenant’s use. Someone coming for an appointment could pull in the driveway and Macfarlane can control her scheduling.
MacFarlane submitted a petition with twenty (20) signatures in favor.
Stein thinks this is the type of use we have a home occupation by law for. There are no employees, there would be one person coming at a time, limited hours, thinks it is consistent with the home occupation bylaw.
Councilor Pinto spoke in favor, knows the board has issued these special permits in the past and knows these individuals have been in the neighborhood a long time.
Gifford Scott (26 Bay View Avenue) has no problem with it.
Patricia Michaud lives at 110 Bay View Avenue and is MacFarlane’s tenant. She is in favor and said MacFarlane does everything quietly.
Cynthia O’Connor (1 Bay View Avenue) is opposed due to the traffic and the parking situation. There is not enough parking. Fire engines had a difficult time getting up the street. O’Connor presented pictures showing the tightness of the street. They have no sidewalks, they already have a daycare that they Scotts run. O’Connor thinks therapy is wonderful but is opposed because of the area.
Stein asked what the hours would be. MacFarlane said she would take a 6:00 appointment at the latest. MacFarlane doesn’t see it posing a traffic issue.
Belair thinks this is what the home occupation is for, thinks with this economy they should approve something like this.
Rosman Dennis (Bay View Avenue) is opposed because of the parking situation. She thinks it would be difficult if customers park on the street.
MacFarlane said one client would be gone when the other arrives. Stein said they could condition staggering.
O’Connor said there is not enough parking for those who live there on Saturdays. MacFarlane said she might work one or two Saturdays a month. O’Connor asked if this opens up things for other home occupations in the area. Stein said no. Stein said she thinks this is why we have a home occupation bylaw. She doesn’t think 3-4 added car trips per day would be a reason to deny.
Lash read a letter of opposition from Elizabeth Wolfe (95 Bay View Avenue), who objected to the request on the grounds of inadequate parking, congestion, public safety, and increased traffic.
Stein asked the applicant how she felt about no appointments after 6:00. Correnti suggested rather than trying to schedule the schedule the Board say that no client shall park on the street. Stein said it was an appropriate suggestion and that they should say that driving customers shall use the driveway.
Harris asked do you think this should be limited to ten (10) years? Stein said no, unless she sells the house to another massage therapist there is no issue.
Belair made a motion to approve the petition subject to two (2) standard conditions and the special conditions that there be no other employees and that client parking is not permitted on the street, they must use a space in the driveway. The motion was seconded by Annie Harris, and approved 5-0.
6. Petition of JANINE JARAS seeking a Variance from minimum width of side yard to construct a first-story addition approximately 9’ x 9’ at 68 Pierpont Street (R-1).
Thomas St. Pierre disclosed that he resided at the 68 Pierpont Street and sat in the audience for this petition.
The property owner Janine Jaras addressed the Board and explained she is seeking approval for a 9’x 9’ addition that will include a bathroom. The only existing bathroom is upstairs on the second floor. The washer dryer is down in the cellar and the headspace is not the great in the cellar. This will add value and property tax. Jaras said this would be a benefit to her parents who frequently visit and have trouble with the stairs.
John Borris (5 Bedford Street) spoke in favor of the petition saying he and his wife are neighbors.
Stein said the nonconformity is not increasing, and it is minor dimensional relief. Harris said the footprint is bigger. Stein said confirmed it’s a single family. Jaras said yes, it’s only 900 square feet. Jaras said the abutter most directly affected is in support and when she offered to share the plans the abutter said she would be fine with anything they do.
Harris made a motion to approve the variance subject to eight (8) standard conditions, seconded by Curran and approved (5-0).
7. Petition of JAMES D’AMICO seeking a variance from parking requirements and a special permit to allow for a dwelling unit within the existing nonconforming structure at 332 LAFAYETTE STREET (R-2).
Stein recused herself and left the room.
D’Amico said they are seeking to add an apartment where the photography studio in the building was once. He said as the Board knows from listening to the real estate blues, they’ve scaled down on staff (at Century 21). The apartment would be approximately 500 sq. ft. He would prefer to rent to somebody who has one car, maybe somebody who is associated with Salem State College. There would be a kitchen, a bathroom, and one bedroom.
Belair said she is familiar with the property and knew those who operated the photography studio lived upstairs. It’s not outside of the use of what was there previously.
Curran asked if a parking space would be dedicated. D’Amico said yes. Belair suggested conditioning that.
Harris asked if the addition was an addition to the Victorian house? D’Amico said yes. D’Amico said there would be a separate entrance for the unit.
Urinsa Amsler (29 Wisteria Street) owns a unit in a two-unit condo association to the rear of the property. She confirmed the unit would be going in the extension in the back. D’Amico, said yes and we will be adding a sliding glass door.
Amsler said she has concerns. They’ve owned the property in back for four (4) years. There was a cherry tree on the Century 21 property, which they thought might damage their slate roof. Amsler contacted Century 21 about this and was displeased with how it was handled. She feels that the general maintenance of the property declined since the photography studio left. Amsler said she felt she needed to come hear was being proposed. Her concern is a situation where there is no attention from the landlord.
Belair suggested the applicant supply the abutter with his contact information. Harris asked about the location of the windows. The applicant and abutter reviewed the site plan and the location of the door and windows. Amsler said there are no trees between this property and their property. Amsler said the fence is falling apart. D’Amico said he was willing to repair or replace the fence and remove the stump. Harris suggested replacing the fence as a condition. Amsler would prefer the fence remains a six (6) foot stockade fence.
Harris made a motion to approve the variance, subject to 10 standard conditions and the special conditions that the existing stockade fence along the property line is replaced or repaired, the stump is removed, and one of the parking spaces is designated for tenant. Dionne seconded the motion and the petition was approved (4-0).
8. CONTINUED: ~Petition of WILLIAM WHARFF requesting a special permit for a change in nonconforming use and variances from maximum number of stories, minimum lot area per dwelling unit, and required parking to allow for construction of a third story and conversion of the current assembly hall to six residential condominiums at 17 NORTH STREET (R2).
Attorney Scott Grover said at the last meeting they presented two development schemes and received input from the neighbors asking for consideration of the original building in the design. Since the last meeting, Grover said much work has been done between the developer, Historic Salem Inc. (HIS), and the neighbors. They have come up with a revised development scheme, which they believe they have support for. Grover said what was left on the table at the last Board of Appeals meeting was design issues. As a result of the design changes the building is much bigger and it can accommodate an additional (7th) unit. This provides the economic basis to support the design changes. There still are eight (8) spaces for seven (7) units (at least one space per unit).
David Jaquith, project architect presented the design. Jaquith said they sat with HIS and made several changes to the roofline, the back of the building has an additional floor to work with the additional height in the front. The site plan has not changed. There have been suggestions from the Historic Commission on screening from North Street, as well as closing off the door to the Elks Lodge bar with lattice work.
Grover said there are members from HIS here who are happy with what we did. Essex Street and North Street had a variety of types of buildings. There is a 3 1/2 story building on one side, 2 1/2 on the other. They needed an extra unit to do all this work and the brackets. The building on many sides will be restored, the new will be combined with the old.
St. Pierre asked what is being considered- the petition before the Board, or a new petition for seven (7) units? Grover said the relief they requested has not changed.
Jane Arlander (93 Federal Street) said she told an interested abutter after speaking with Amy Lash that it would be readvertised. Lash said when she spoke with Grover earlier in the day, that’s what she understood they would be doing.
Doug Jones speaking on behalf of Historic Salem said it’s been a good process and they are happy with the results.
John Carr (7 River Street) said the developers have been very responsive and he is widely enthusiastic about the result. He said thank you to the Board for not voting too quickly last month.
Jessica Herbert (Salem Historic Commission) found some minor things they’d like to change, though is thrilled to see what they’ve done.
Jane Arlander (93 Federal Street) said she was speaking on behalf of those on Federal Street Court she has concerns about noise, parking and the density change. They can’t find place to park. She has off street parking, those who don’t have trouble.
Gary Cherry (25 North Street) attended the first meeting and thought it was helpful and produced a better design. Cherry thinks the parties worked well together.
James Popee and Pamela Popee (19 North Street) enthusiastically supports the plan, they think the support is unanimous. Historic Salem Inc. advocated for the larger building. None the neighbors like the additional unit, but it’s a price they are willing to pay. Popee said the people that are interested are present each time.
Stein thinks the notice for this project is fine, nothing has really changed. Tom St. Pierre does not believe that is so when something is increasing.
Curran said snow removal is an issue and a plan needs to be developed. Grover said this plan also goes before the Planning Board. Grover stepped out for a moment to talk to his client; he returned and requested continuance to the August meeting of the Board of Appeals. They will submit and amended petition and advertise.
Curran made a motion to continue the item to August 27th, seconded by Dionne and approved (5-0).
Old/New Business
90 Summer Street
Lash read a letter from John Donahue requesting that the Board of Appeals withdraw the decision for 90 Summer Street. Donahue said he does not have an interest in pursuing litigation since the house on Federal Street to be moved to Summer Street has been demolished.
Curran made a motion to rescind the decision for 90 Summer Street dated March 13, 2008, seconded by Stein and approved (5-0).
Adjournment
There being no further business before the Board of Appeals this evening, Curran made a motion to adjourn the meeting seconded by Stein and approve (5-0).
The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Amy Lash, Staff Planner
Approved by the Board of Appeals 8/27/08
| 
