Peabody Planning Board Meeting - September 3, 2026: Zoning Change Recommendation and Administrative Actions
Peabody Planning Board Meeting - September 3, 2026
The Peabody Planning Board held a public hearing on a proposed zoning amendment for two parcels on Lake Street, followed by administrative actions. The board voted unanimously to recommend the zoning change to the City Council and approved minutes and an extension.
Public Comments & Testimony
- A letter of opposition from Randolph Blunt, dated August 23, 2026, was received and entered into the record. The letter expressed opposition to the zone change from R1 to BN for the subject parcels.
- No oral public comments were made in favor or opposition during the hearing.
Discussion Items
- Zoning Amendment for 0 and 30 Lake Street: Attorney Kalty, representing Lake Street LLC (owner Mr. Salvaggio), presented a request to rezone two parcels from R1 (Residential) to BN (Business Neighborhood). He explained that the parcels were originally zoned BN, but a clerical error during a zoning map revision around 2018-2020 changed them to R1. The owner had purchased the property in 2017 under the impression it was BN, and a 2017 subdivision plan approved by the Planning Board also indicated BN. The parcels are adjacent to BN-zoned properties including a gas station and convenience store. Board members asked clarifying questions about the location, the history, and the status of an abutter. The Chair noted that the adjacent abutter at 32 Lake Street was notified and had not objected to the change, but a letter of opposition from Randolph Blunt was received.
- The board then opened the floor for public comment, but no one spoke. The board moved to recommend the zoning change to the City Council.
Key Outcomes
- Vote on Zoning Change: The board voted unanimously (6-0) to recommend that the City Council adopt the proposed zoning amendment for 0 Lake Street and 30 Lake Street, changing the zoning from R1 to BN.
- Approval of Minutes: The board approved the minutes of the August 13, 2026 meeting.
- Extension Granted: The board granted an extension to Nicholas Betts for the site building permit plans for 81 Prospect Street, continuing the matter to the October 1, 2026 meeting.
Meeting Transcript
Like to call to order the PBD Planning Board meeting uh agenda for Thursday, September third, two thousand twenty-six at seven PM held at Peabody City Hall, Wigan Auditorium Twenty Four Low Street, PBD Mass. At this time I'd like to suspend the uh planning board meeting and enter into a public hearing. Notice is hereby given that the PB Planning Board City of Peabody will conduct a public hearing on Thursday evening, September third, two thousand twenty six at seven PM in Wigan Auditorium, Peabody City Hall, PBD Mass to consider amending the zoning ordinance of the city of Peabody. This ordinance shall take effect as provided by law for the remote participation using Zoom for this platform. At this time I'd like to uh uh uh introduce uh attorney Kalty who's representing for this proposal. Here in Peabody at Forty Lowell Street. I'm appearing on behalf of uh Lake Street uh LLC, uh whose address is 7 Pawnview Road here in Peabody, Massachusetts. Uh the manager of uh Pawnview LLC is the owner of uh two parcels of land uh here in the PBD uh here in the City of Peabody, one being 30 Lake Street and the other being zero Lake Street. Um these parcels were purchased in 2017 at the time of the purchase. Uh Mr. Salvaggio, my client, uh, was under the impression uh based on the records at the City of PBD Assessor's office that this was uh zone BN. Uh the other properties uh that he had acquired at that same time were BN. Uh he owns, he's the owner and operator of the gas station uh at the premises. He uh at the time uh had a plan uh recorded at the registry of deeds that this also occurred in uh uh 2017, and that plan was recorded with the notation and approved by the planning board, by the way, with the notation uh saying it was BN. Uh that's because that's what the records in the City of PBD at the time indicated. Uh approximately a year and a half later uh or by 2020, uh Mr. Salvaggio was uh notified um via a tax bill uh that his zoning was uh R1. Uh he is the only R1 uh uh uh in in the midst of this area of Lake Street. Uh we're asking that um the land be rezoned, redesignated from R1 to uh BN uh and that would join uh the um designation of the parcels uh that are that he is almost part of. Uh he's immediately adjacent uh on the left-hand side uh of his property is uh the 711. Is it 711 still or are we uh store 24? Whatever the convenience store is. And then of course uh gas station uh operated by Joe Sun, which is uh formally and always referred to historically as Ballard's uh gas station. But um we're here this evening as a follow-up uh to our meetings uh with the subcommittee at the um at the uh city council. Uh I believe that they have forwarded a recommendation to the planning board uh that the matter uh be considered favorably by the planning board, and uh we will go uh from here with a hopeful favorable recommendation. We will go here to the City Council uh for its uh hearing, which I believe is going to be held on uh 24th of this month. Um my client is here this evening. Uh actually, Mr. Mello, who prepared the 2017 plan, uh, is here this evening, and uh we're happy to answer any questions that you may have. Any questions from the board through the chair um to uh the counselor. So in essence, uh are we here to correct uh like a scrivener's error of some sort. Is this to make something may if right a wrong of the past? I think it's uh to write a uh a clerical error of sorts. I believe uh what caused the uh matter to uh uh come about was uh that um during the tenure of uh uh Karen Sawyer, we had uh and uh uh Mayor Bonfante, we had uh done some revisions to the zoning map. I believe those uh revisions uh showed this as R1. However, those um I believe that uh that was an extension of the R1 zoning district uh to an area where it ought not have been extended to. However, um the map indicated uh that these were R1, while the assessors records uh and older maps uh uh reflected that they were uh BN. Um I believe that uh yes, one way of looking at it is uh correcting a wrong. I don't believe there was anything morally wrong or terribly wrong, uh, but it was I believe kind of an administrative slash clerical error. And and what did you say that Eastern Land Survey uh did in 2017? They um uh uh did a subdivision plan, an A and R plan uh before the planning board, uh which uh this board uh signed on that it was uh it it indicated uh B N in accordance with the assessor's records. Um as it turns out the suggestion was made it wasn't BN, but the recording of the plan doesn't have a special significance, only that it reflected the records uh that were available at the time. And and these two lots uh have not combined because they're under the same ownership. No. They conformed to zoning. They're what? They uh you're asking whether or not there was a merger? Yes. Uh I believe not. Thank you.
openpublica.com