Danvers ZBA approves temporary storage containers, OKs replacement contractor building at 25 Pope’s Lane

The Danvers Zoning Board of Appeals on Aug. 25 approved the replacement of an undersized, nonconforming house at 25 Pope’s Lane with a new contractor building and granted temporary relief to allow three storage containers on the lot — two of which will sit in the side-yard setback — for up to one year or until construction is complete.

The board’s action included three separate approvals: a finding under the zoning by-law to tear down the existing nonconforming structure and replace it with a building set back 22 feet from the side lot line (improving the current 9.1-foot setback); a temporary variance to permit two containers in the setback; and a special permit allowing three containers on the property for a limited time. All motions passed on unanimous voice votes.

Why it matters: The property sits in the Highway Corridor zoning district and has operated as a contractor’s yard since 2018; the applicant says the replacement building is intended to make the site more functional and neater and to reduce the need for outdoor storage in the long term. Board members and town staff flagged public-safety and permitting issues — notably an unregistered above-ground diesel tank on the site — and attached conditions intended to address those concerns.

Applicant presentation and project scope Nancy McCann, attorney for MJD Property Group LLC, described the application as an effort to replace a single-family house repurposed as a contractor yard with a building better designed for that business. Michael Selig, identified as owner of MGS (MJD) Property Group, said he has operated a contractor’s yard at the location since acquiring the site in 2018. Jay Palakowitz of Hancock Associates presented site plans and explained the proposal includes a steel building sized in two sections (roughly 35 by 70 feet and 15 by 30 feet; “about 2,900 square feet,” he said), a new retaining wall, and a crushed-stone storage area to the north for infiltration.

McCann told the board the applicant initially requested permission for four storage containers but had already removed one and was seeking authorization for three temporarily while the new building is constructed. “We really only need approval for 3 storage containers rather than the requested 4,” McCann said during her presentation.

Board concerns, permitting and safety conditions Board members pressed the applicant on the number and location of containers, whether the containers would interfere with construction, and how long they would remain on site. The applicant and engineer said containers are movable and could be temporarily shifted during demolition and construction, and that the building is designed to reduce future reliance on containers.

Planning director Brian Sikele told the board the fuel tank observed on site — described in the meeting as a fuel “cube” — is not registered with the town and is subject to registration and fire-department oversight. Owner Michael Selig acknowledged the diesel tank and said, “I have a diesel on-site. I did not know I had to register it. I apologize.”

Town staff and board members emphasized stormwater and site-plan requirements: the project will require planning board site-plan approval and the town’s stormwater-permit process because the work involves significant regrading and relocation of subsurface drainage chambers installed under earlier approvals.

Conditions attached to approvals The approvals carry several conditions the board added or the applicant accepted: (1) the three storage containers are allowed only temporarily, up to one year from today’s date (the board put an explicit end date of Aug. 25, 2026) or earlier if construction is completed; (2) the two containers in the setback are allowed only under a temporary variance tied to the same time limit; (3) all storage containers must be removed as soon as the new building is completed; (4) the applicant must resolve fuel-storage permitting and accept fire-department inspection within 30 days; and (5) the applicant will submit to a ZBA check-in one year after issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The board also instructed that the written decision note the lot’s hardship is primarily its irregular shape and undersized area relative to the district’s minimum lot size.

Votes and next steps The board approved the variance, finding and special permit by unanimous voice vote. The project still requires site-plan approval and formal stormwater permitting with the town’s engineering department before construction can begin. The planning director and engineer indicated minor modifications to the subsurface drainage layout and continued coordination with engineering will be necessary.

Context and background The property previously received zoning relief and planning-board approvals in 2018–2019 to allow contractor-yard operations, including a retaining wall and drainage work. The board discussed an earlier 2018 decision that granted broad relief for an undersized lot; subsequent planning-board special-permit/site-plan approvals in 2019 addressed site improvements. Board members said the current application improves the building’s conformance by increasing the side-yard setback from about 9.1 feet to 22 feet.

What the board did not do The board did not grant permanent approval for containers in the setback; the variance and special permit are explicitly temporary and conditioned. Board members also noted they would expect the fire department to verify and clear any fuel-storage issues during the 30-day timeframe.

Outlook If the applicant obtains the required planning-board site-plan approval and stormwater permits, the board’s decision allows demolition and construction to proceed, with the temporary container relief expiring at the earlier of Aug. 25, 2026, or building completion (and subject to the conditions above).