City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
Minutes of Meeting
Wednesday, April 18, 2012
A meeting of the Salem Zoning Board of Appeals (“Salem ZBA”) was held on Wednesday, April 18, 2012 in the third floor conference room of 120 Washington St., Salem, Massachusetts at 6:30 p.m.
Those present were: Richard Dionne, chairing the meeting, Annie Harris, Jamie Metsch, Jimmy Tsitsinos (alternate) and Bonnie Belair (alternate). Those absent were: Rebecca Curran, Chair. Also present were incumbent member Mike Duffy, Thomas St. Pierre, Director of Inspectional Services, and Danielle McKnight, Staff Planner.
Mr. Dionne opens the meeting at 6:30 p.m.
Approval of Minutes
Mr. Dionne moves to approve the minutes of 3/21/12, seconded by Ms. Belair and approved 4-0 (Mr. Metsch, Mr. Tsitsinos, Ms. Belair and Mr. Dionne in favor, none opposed).
Ms. Harris arrives at 6:31.
Public hearing: Petition of THOMAS J. PELLETIER requesting a Special Permit to change a nonconforming use (office space) to another nonconforming use, in order to convert the second floor of the building located at 214 DERBY ST to a residential unit (R2 Zoning District). A Variance from off-street parking regulations is also requested.
Documents & Exhibitions:
- Application date-stamped 4/12/12 and accompanying materials
Thomas Pelletier presents his petition. He says he wants to convert the office space in the building to residential because he has had difficulty renting the space, and the market is better for residential. He says he would need to rent parking spaces in the South Harbor garage in order to meet the parking requirements. Two 2-bedroom units are proposed.
Mr. Dionne opens the issue up for public comment. No one is here to comment; he closes the public comment portion.
Ms. Belair says had been concerned about parking, but he’s offering to lease 3 spaces; she suggests making that a condition. She notes that this is less detrimental because a residential unit would be less dense than office space, which would have employees there every day. Ms. Harris notes that he has a hardship in that he has not been able to rent the space. She says R2 is a residential zone and we encourage housing in the downtown.
Mr. Metsch notes that he is taking care of the parking. He just wants to make sure there are spaces available in the garage for long-term lease.
Mr. Pelletier says he spoke to the city’s parking director and was told there is plenty of space available.
Ms. Belair moves to approve the petition with seven standard conditions and one special condition: Petitioner is required to lease three parking spaces to satisfy the zoning requirements. The motion is seconded by Mr. Metsch and approved 5-0 (Mr. Tsistinos, Mr. Metsch, Mr. Dionne, Ms. Harris, Ms. Belair in favor, none opposed). The decision is hereby incorporated as part of these minutes.
Continued public hearing: Petition of LESLIE BYRNE, requesting a Special Permit under Sec. 3.3.5 of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to alter and extend a nonconforming single-family house on the property located at 16 SAUNDERS ST, Salem, MA (R2 Zoning District). APPLICANT REQUESTS TO CONTINUE TO MAY 16, 2012.
Ms. Harris makes a motion to continue the hearing to May 16, 2012, seconded by Mr. Metsch and approved 5-0 (Mr. Metsch, Mr. Dionne, Ms. Harris and Ms. Belair and Mr. Tsitsinos in favor, none opposed).
Public hearing: Petition of DAN RANDALL requesting a Special Permit to expand a nonconforming structure in order to construct a 20.7’ x 14.6’ addition on the rear of the house on 37 CHESTNUT ST, Salem, MA, (R1 Zoning District).
Documents & Exhibitions:
- Application date-stamped 3/22/12 and accompanying materials
- Letter from Jon and Jenny Reardon, 35 Chestnut St., dated 4/10/12
- Letter from Claire Hayes, 39 Chestnut St., dated 4/10/12
- Plot Plan, 37 Chestnut Street, Salem, Mass, dated 2/10/12, prepared by Edward J. Farrell
- Proposed South Exterior Elevation drawing, no date
- Proposed East Exterior Elevation drawing, no date
- Proposed West Exterior Elevation drawing, no date
- Existing elevation drawings, no date
Phil Gillespie, part owner, introduces himself. He is here with contractor Peter Strout and with David Foley, architect for the project. He says the request is for a small addition on the back of the house that needs repair – he would like to rebuild it. It’s a sun room now. He would like to add 2 feet to the back. Mr. Gillespie submits a letter to the Board from Claire Hayes, 39 Chestnut St., in favor of the petition.
Mr. Foley shows the Board the floor plans.
Ms. Belair asks if there would be another deck; Mr. Foley says no. Mr. Gillespie says they may put in a brick patio. Ms. McKnight reads letters from Jon and Jenny Reardon, 35 Chestnut St., dated 4/10/12, and a letter from Claire Hayes, 39 Chestnut St., dated 4/10/12, into the record.
Ms. Harris notes that the abutters at 39 and 35 Chestnut St. are the only people who would be able to see the addition.
Mr. Dionne opens the public comment portion; no one is here to comment; he closes the public comment portion.
Mr. Metsch says he likes the design; it suits the applicant’s needs, and has been blessed by the Historical Commission. It seems in keeping with the neighborhood. His only concern would be for the abutter located only 5 feet away, but the abutter doesn’t object. He says he has no concern with traffic flow, it fits the neighborhood and improves property. There would be no detrimental effect on neighborhood. Ms. Belair notes this is minimal relief, and it is an unusual lot. Also, both abutters are supportive.
Ms. Harris says this is a minimal change and will be an improvement to the property.
Mr. Metsch asks about the proximity of windows to the lot line. Mr. Strout says the distance 2.5 feet to the corner of the building, then columns will be coming in – he says they will meet the 3-foot setback. Mr. St. Pierre said no glazing would be required.
Mr. Metsch moves to approve the petition with eight standard conditions, seconded by Ms. Belair and approved 5-0 (Mr. Tsitsinos, Mr. Metsch, Mr. Dionne, Ms. Belair and Ms. Harris in favor, none opposed). The decision is hereby incorporated as part of these minutes.
Continued public hearing: Petition of BRUCE BORNSTEIN, TRUSTEE, KING’S COVE REALTY TRUST, requesting a Special Permit under Sec. 3.3.2 of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to change a nonconforming to allow an additional use of a portion of the first floor as a micro brewery of beer to be sold wholesale (remaining first floor to continue use as an environmental testing lab) for the property located at 6 NICHOLS ST, Salem, MA (R2 Zoning District).
Documents & Exhibitions:
- Application date-stamped 2/14/12 and accompanying materials
- Nichols Street Second Floor Renovation, dated 4/20/04, prepared by H.H. Morant & Col, Inc. Architects
- Plot Plan of 6 Nichols Street, Salem, MA, dated 11/1/11, prepared by John G. Dick
- Snow Removal Plan – 6 Nichols St., submitted as email attachment 4/11/12
- Letter from Mark, Patricia and James Chesley, 6 Hanson St., dated 4/12/12
- Letter to Leo Jodion dated 12/24/03 from Ronan, Segal & Harrington, submitted by Mr. Jodoin with attached documents: Police Department Incident Reports 3/21/00 and 3/7/01, photographs dated 11/2010 and 2012, Special Permit Decision date-stamped 5/26/04
- Internet articles submitted by Pam Ryan, 4 Nichols St. “How to Make a Home Brewery a Commercial Nanobrewery,” “Info regarding explosions at microbreweries,” “Abita brewery tank explodes” (1/13/09), “Explosion rocks Abita Brewery in St. Tammany Parish” (1/13/09), “Two injured in beer explosion at Franconia Brewing Company in McKinney” (2/18/12), “Beer tank explodes at Otter Creek” (11/14/11), “After explosion, Otter Creek brews again” (11/16/11), “Royal Univerew Brewery Explosion in Denmark” (2/20/12)
- Letter from Mary Ferreira, 7 Crescent Dr., dated 4/18/12
- Photographs submitted at meeting, dated 5/30/12
- Letter from Joan Lovely, Councillor-at-Large, dated 3/21/12
Attorney George Atkins presents the petition for Nichols St. He says the owner has gotten a new contractor for snow removal as a result of the board’s comments. He has submitted a snow removal plan to the Board. He submits to the Board language for a draft condition prohibiting retail aspects of the business.
Mr. Metsch asks for clarification that snow not able to be stored on site is to be removed. Atty Atkins passes out additional copies of the snow removal conditions with full text.
Mr. Metsch moves to reopen the public portion of the hearing to discuss the new information, seconded by Mr. Tsistinos, 5-0 in favor.
Mr. Dionne asks for comment from any member of the public who wishes to speak.
Leo Jodoin, 8 Hanson St., presents photographs to the Board. He says his objection is not over a parking space. He says he has received a statement from Attorney Atkins’ office granting him a parking easement. Attorney Atkins asks if this is relevant to the new information being presented. Mr. Jodoin says he is going to discuss snow removal. He reads from a police report about a snow removal violation on the property. He quotes from the minutes of the last meeting. Ms. Belair asks if he could just speak to what he wants to say and not try to characterize what others have said.
He says he has shoveled around the fire hydrant for many years. He says he has contacted the city about this problem previously. He shows photos of snow removal in process, saying that the contractor had piled the snow very close to his house. He says he has requested plans since 2004 and has not been able to get them. Ms. Harris asks how this snow removal plan looks to him. Mr. Jodoin says it’s terrible – it would mean dumping snow near his home. Delivery trucks have been coming in.
Ms. Harris notes that the deliveries are an existing condition. Mr. Jodoin says he can’t trust this. The tractor trailors are so long they stick out in the middle of Hanson St., obstructing traffic. He doesn’t see any buffer zone. He’s pushing his property beyond the loading ramp. He says because of where the deliveries are coming in, this will push the snow removal area closer to his house. He says his wall is worn down because of the snow storage.
Ms. Harris asks for clarification that the problem with the snow plowing plan is that it will push snow closer to Mr. Jodoin’s house. Mr. Metsch asks Mr. St. Pierre what’s allowed as far as the vehicles moving on the site.
Mr. St. Pierre says this building is preexisting nonconforming, and never would have gone through site plan review. It’s not a new project, so we are dealing with problems now from an existing building very close to a residential property.
Arthur Sargent, Councillor-at-Large, 8 Maple Ave., says this was advertised as a continuation of public hearing, so people should be allowed to speak on things other than snow removal. He says he has been called for 10 years about this snow issue and has shoveled the snow himself at times. He says the Board should consider whether the special permit conditions previously granted have been adhered to, not what the applicant promises to do in the future.
John Boris, Chair of the Salem Housing Authority, says he as an additional problem he would like to address. He represents the 40 SHA abutters on Colonial Terrace. He says they did not receive a notice; Ms. McKnight checks the abutter mailing list and says a notice was mailed to the Salem Housing Authority at 27 Charter St.
Ms. Belair moves to fully reopen public portion, seconded by Mr. Metsch and approved 5-0 (Mr. Metsch, Mr. Dionne, Mr. Tsitsinos, Ms. Belair, and Ms. Harris in favor, none opposed).
Attorney Atkins notes for record that he objects to that vote.
Ms. Belair comments that we should listen to the audio from the last meeting to determine exactly what happened in terms of closing the public hearing.
John Boris, Chair, Salem Housing Authority, on behalf of Colonial Terrace residents, says they are concerned about traffic, delivery noise, and proximity of the brewery to their units, which are 25-30 feet away in some cases. He says pieces of brewery equipment may blow up, and they have concerns about odors. They are concerned about the negative impact in general of having a brewery in the neighborhood. They are opposed to the petition.
Pam Ryan, 4 Nichols St., has packets of photos and information to present to the Board. She shows a photo of the back of her property and its proximity to the brewery. She notes there is graffiti on the building and a broken drain pipe that has never been fixed. She mentions the previously issued special permit, saying the conditions had not been met. She says the rock wall has recently been repaired.
Ms. Ryan notes that she has highlighted some points in her research about microbreweries. She says several years ago, a brewery in New Orleans residential neighborhood had an explosion of debris throughout the neighborhood. She cites other examples of explosions at breweries. She is concerned about her children playing so close to the proposed brewery location. She says there is a 4-foot sinkhole in the loading dock area. She notes also that the brewing is already going on. She says there is also a huge amount of wastewater associated with brewing. She doesn’t think the Salem sewer system can support this. She shows a photo of a hose attached to the building and says Mr. Bornstein may be dumping the wastewater. She also says there are a number of things breweries need to do in order
to become commercial, including meeting health requirements, etc. She says there are many questions that need to be addressed before this goes further. She is also concerned about odors. She feels this is not a clean industry for Salem.
Ms. Harris asks if she found any information about smell. Ms. Ryan says she has not researched this. She submits a letter from Mary Ferreira, 7 Crescent Drive, also in opposition.
Ward 4 Councillor Jerry Ryan, 4 Nichols St., says another neighbor from 6 Hanson St. has submitted a letter in opposition. He states his opposition to the petition. Councillor Ryan reads the letter from Mark, Patricia and James Chesley, 6 Hanson St., dated 4/12/12.
Joan Lovely, Councillor-at-Large, 14 Story St., has concerns about snow removal and the safety of microbreweries; there has been a concern about this in the neighborhood. She says snow cannot be removed offsite and put elsewhere in the neighborhood – it must be taken somewhere to be property disposed of. She has been dealing with this issue with the Council for many years.
Mr. Dionne closes the public comment portion of the hearing.
Ms. Belair says that at the last meeting, she was opposed, and over the month she has given it thought – she really wants to work with businesses. She was changing her mind and considering putting a one-year limit on the Special Permit because of the fact that the petitioner has not been a good neighbor. She may have given the petitioner a chance with a one-year permit to show he could comply. After listening to comments tonight, however, she is now concerned about the waste – how will he deal with that, where does it go, what is the plan? She is concerned.
Ms. Harris – brewery has been going on for a while – did we know that?
Mr. St. Pierre – that was a testing run. That was discussed at the last meeting.
Mr. Metsch wants to hear about waste and venting. He was left thinking that they would be under the purview of the health inspector, and certain other checks, etc. would be in place. That’s not clear. He would like to hear if that is part of the plan. His assumption is they have to have an annual inspection, or more, like a restaurant.
Mr. Tsistinos – the neighbors are not happy – that’s what I’m concerned about. All the immediate neighbors are unhappy – since 2004, nothing has been resolved.
Ms. Harris – I’m upset about the condition of the property – it’s not well maintained.
Mr. Metsch – from the previous Special Permit, some items had not been addressed. Ms. Belair – for granting a Special Permit, we have to look at whether the use will be more detrimental to neighborhood. It’s hard to say it won’t, based on neighbors’ comments. To put this into perspective – if this business were jarring jelly, would we be reacting the same way? Perhaps – it’s cooked, jarred under pressure, and distributed – it’s similar. It’s the production of a small consumable – is that so far out for this particular property in this neighborhood? I’m leaning toward no.
Ms. Harris – there are concerns about it being a brewery, but those are not the only concerns.
Ms. Belair – my concern last time was for the many uses – density and number of uses in R2 was a problem.
Mr. Tsistinos – my concern is more for the track record. Ms. Belair – that’s why I thought to condition it with a time limit.
Mr. Dionne – in the R2 zone, safety is the ultimate concern – and neighbors on both sides are upset. Do these microbreweries have potential for explosion? How are they dealing with waste? I’m not in favor at this point.
Attorney Atkins asks Mr. Bornstein to address the waste system, which is says this is a 10 gallon system. Attorney Atkins says that’s not a lot, and that Mr. Bornstein is a chemist who has been using gases in this building for many years.
Mr. Bornstein – the main waste is spent grain, which is purchased by farms for compost. Water from the hoses is filtered water – he was letting out drinking water with a chlorine flavor into the street. Mr. Dionne questions whether it’s appropriate to put that water in the street.
Attorney Atkins referred to his comments at the last meeting that Salem Beer Works has a brewery right in their restaurant – he hasn’t heard any issues relative to safety or odors – there are people eating right next to it. The Licensing Board, state, Board of Health – all would have to act on this. Waste questions would be addressed by these agencies. A snow removal plan was submitted to try to solve the snow problem. The space next to Mr. Jodoin’s house was left open so it would not impact his house. Mr. Bornstein has been using various gases there for many years – nothing has happened, and this was an industrial building. All the houses, he presumes, were purchased when the industrial building was in use. There was once a machine shop there – this has
a history of being in a residential zone. Some of this has been exaggerated. Notwithstanding that, and recognizing everyone’s sincerity and the Board’s comments, he requests to withdraw the petition without prejudice.
Ms. Harris move to allow petitioner to withdraw without prejudice, seconded by Mr. Tsitsinos, and approved 5-0 (Ms. Harris, Ms. Belair, Mr. Dionne, Mr. Metsch and Mr Tsitsinos in favor, none opposed). The decision is hereby incorporated as part of these minutes.
Old/New Business: Request to extend Variances issued to A.L. PRIME ENERGY CONSULTANTS for the properties located at 175 LAFAYETTE ST. (B-1 and R-3) and 183 LAFAYETTE ST. (B-1).
Documents & Exhibitions:
- Request letter from Attorney George Atkins dated 4/16/12
Attorney George Atkins presents the request for an extension of Variances issued for 175 and 183 Lafayette St. He says the Board acted on this matter a year ago; the Planning Board acted after ZBA, but didn’t make their decision until November. In addition, this project needs Fire Dept. approvals to go forward. They just got those, and now they need to go before City Council. Part of the property is owned by another party, and that transaction needs to be completed and current tenant needs to be moved. He asks for an extension of six months to begin the project.
Mr. Tsistinos moves to extend the Variances issued for a period of six months until November 12, 2012, seconded by Ms. Belair and approved 5-0 (Ms. Belair, Mr. Tsitsinos, Mr. Metsch, Mr. Dionne, and Ms. Harris in favor, none opposed). The decision is hereby incorporated as part of these minutes.
Ms. Belair moves to adjourn the meeting seconded by Mr. Tsistinos and unanimously approved. The meeting adjourns at 8:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Danielle McKnight, Staff Planner
Approved by the Board of Appeals 5/16/12
| 
