Board tables request to convert 2119 Burnett Ave from dental office to dormitory; asks applicant to re-notice as dormitory

A local zoning board on an unidentified date tabled an application to convert 2119 Burnett Avenue from its current commercial (dental) use to shared student housing and directed the applicant to re-notice the application specifically as a request for a dormitory use. Applicant Suzanne Collins said the property has been used as a dental office for decades, is currently grandfathered as a commercial use within a single-family zone, and has been on the market for more than 600 days. Collins and her realtor, Linda Luciano, told the board prospective buyers have been scarce because dental equipment and the building layout make commercial re-use difficult. Jordan White, a designer who described himself as an architect experienced in commercial real estate, described plans to live in the neighboring 2117 and convert 2119 into shared housing with a shared kitchen and shared baths. He said the structure has multiple egress points, basement exits and a deep lot that opens to a parking area he estimated could hold roughly 16 vehicles. Board members and staff discussed whether the petition should be advertised as a general residential conversion or as a dormitory. The board concluded dormitory is a distinct category and must be renoticed; several members said the original notice as “residential units” did not fairly alert neighbors to the request for a dormitory-style shared residence. The board also flagged building-safety and permitting issues: the board and attendees said a sprinkler system will likely be required if the building is used as bedrooms occupied by multiple people and that the proposal must undergo site-plan review by the planning board. City Engineer Chris Marini asked whether a dormitory is merely a subtype of residence; the board clarified the local code treats a dormitory as a specific use, often linked to colleges and universities. Board members discussed the difference between a dormitory, a rooming house and multifamily housing and signaled that a rooming-house outcome would be out of character for this neighborhood. During the meeting a motion to table the application was made, seconded and approved. The board instructed staff to reword the application notice to request a dormitory use and scheduled the application to return on October 1 at 5:30 p.m. The board also advised the applicant that site-plan review may be submitted to the planning board after the zoning-use issue is resolved but said there is no point in initiating the planning-board site-plan process until the use variance is finalized. The applicant and realtor provided additional details in response to board questions: the dental tenant expects to vacate by Sept. 30; the property has been marketed on MLS and other listing services despite not having a for-sale sign; combined property taxes for the two parcels were stated at about $20,000 per year; and initial renovation plans anticipate creating roughly six to seven bedrooms, with final configuration subject to code and permit review.