Loading...
93-95 CANAL STREET - ZBA (2) 93 -T5,cox,NOA r Zoning Board Project Status Sheet Address & Applicant: Date Submitted to BOA: Clerk Stamp: 1 ( 2 /I Variances Only - Constructive Approval Date: (100 days from filing) EI/Abutters List Requested: Abutters Notice Sent: oz Notice to Abutting Cities & Towns, Councillors: �2" Legal Notice posted at City Hall: (14 days before meeting) Legal Notice Emailed & Confirmed: � /Legal Notice Posted on Web: Agenda to Applicant: Applicant's email address or fax number to send agenda: Opened at Meeting: f Continued Meetings: �� co r Extension For Signed & Clerk Stamped? Closed at Meeting: Decision: G ra named Decision Filed: Appeal Period Over: after de inion filed) � (2.f°`dap x Decision Sent to Applicant: Notice of Decision Sent to abutters, cities and towns, councillors: ZBA ACTION FORM BOARD'MEMBERS ' MOTION' SECOND «DOTE:: Date: 1-7/1 6 Rebecca Curran (Chair) Mike Duffy Petitioner: , CkICn'l/A?,W y Tom Watkins y Peter Copelas Address: ej 3 —Q S C o-nc>— Jimmy Tsitsinos x S�CTee '� Jim Hacker(Alt.) Paul Viccica(Alt.) Total: Conditions: WPetitioner shall comply with all city and state statutes, ordinances, codes and regulations. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted to and approved by the Building Commissioner. �7 ®All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. ®Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction. 6 ®Exterior finishes of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing structure. W A Certificate of Occupancy is to be obtained. 1 Q A Certificate of Inspection is to be obtained. ❑Petitioner shall obtain street numbering from the City of Salem Assessor's Office and shall display said r� number so as to be visible from the street. (� ©Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to,the Planning Board. ❑Unless this Decision expressly provides otherwise, any zoning relief granted does not empower or authorize the Petitioner to demolish or reconstruct the structure(s)located on the subject property to an extent of more than fifty percent (50%) of its floor area or more than fifty percent(50%)of its replacement cost at the time of destruction. If the structure is demolished by any means to an extent of more than fifty percent(50%)of its replacement cost or more than fifty percent (50%)of its floor area at the time of destruction, it shall not be reconstructed except in conformity with the provisions of the Ordinance. °I) tahe bue4t - a bo re mrdd f�gNDl - 6 CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL 120 WASHINGTON STREET*SALEM,MAssect-nU &ao P 12: 4b KIMBERLEY DtuscoLL TELE:978-745-9595 ♦ FAX:978-740-9846 MAYOR - c cay March 30, 2016 Decision City of Salem Board of Appeals Petition of SCHIAVUZZO REALTY LLC seeking a Special Permit from the provisions of Sec. 3.3.2 Nonconforming Uses of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to allow the change from one nonconforming use of a candy factory to another nonconforming use of residential dwelling units at the property of 93-95 CANAL STREET (Map 33 Lots 164, 165)(B-4 Zoning District). A public hearing on the above Petition was opened on February 17, 2016 and continued on Match 16, 2016 pursuant to M.G.L Ch. 40A, 5 11. The hearing was closed Match 16, 2016 with the following Salem Board of Appeals members present: Rebecca Curran (Chair), Peter A. Copelas, Mike Duffy, Tom Watkins, Jimmy Tsitsinos. The petitioner is seeking a Special Permit from the provisions of Sec. 3.3.2 Nonconforming Uses of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to allow the change from one nonconforming use of a candy factory to another nonconforming use of residential dwelling units. Statements of fact: 1. In the petition date-stamped January 26, 2016, the Petitioner requested a Special Permit per See. 3.3.2 Nonconforming User of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to allow the change from one nonconforming use of a candy factory to another nonconforming use of residential dwelling units. 2. Attorney Atkins presented the petition on behalf of the petitioner. 3. The subject property is located in a B-4 Zoning District. 4. The property was previously used as a candy manufacturing facility for over forty years (40) and employed between six (6) and thirty (30) 'employees. Shipping and deliveries were made from Canal Street and included small box trucks and large trucks making deliveries twice (2) a day. The facility operating hours were from 6am to 5pm. 5. The petitioner proposed to change an existing nonconforming use of a food and manufacturing facility to eight (8) residential units within the existing building footprint. 6. There are commercial properties located directly on either side of the subject property and multi-family residential buildings along Canal Street within the same zoning district. 7. The petitioner proposes to sell these residential units as condominiums. 8. The petitioner proposed to renovate the existing structure and add a ramp in the rear of the building for accessibility. The petitioner also proposed to extend the existing second story such that the entire building will be a two (2)-story structure. 9. The petitioner will be providing fifteen (15) parking spaces, three (3) more spaces than required number of spaces per the zoning ordinance. City of Salem Board of Appeals March 30,2016 Project: 93-95 Canal Street Page 2 of 3 10. The petitioner proposed to continue to share an existing driveway with the property located at 89 Canal Street (Map 33 Lot 163). 11. In response to public concern that the residential units may be rented to Salem State students, the Board weighed whether or not the approval of the proposal could be conditioned subject to the residential units being owner occupied. 12. At the public meeting on February 17, 2016, the Board requested a legal opinion from the City Solicitor for a decision on whether the ZBA has the authority to condition the approval of the proposal subject to the residential units being owner occupied. 13. On March 2, 2016, the ZBA received a legal opinion from the City Solicitor with a statement that the Board likely does not have the authority condition an approval of the proposal based on the units being owner occupied. 14. The requested relief, if granted, would allow the Petitioner to allow the change from one nonconforming use of a candy factory to another nonconforming use of residential dwelling units. 15. At the public hearing no (0) members of the public spoke in favor of and three (3) spoke in opposition to the petition. The Salem Board of Appeals, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the public hearing, and after thorough review of the petition, including the application narrative and plans, and the Petitioner's presentation and public testimony, makes the following findings that the proposed project meets the provisions of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance: Findings for Special Permit The proposed change in use is not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing nonconforming use. 1. The proposed change in use would not be more substantially detrimental than the existing non- conforming structure to the impact on the social, economic or community needs served by the proposal as it provides an affordable housing option for families. 2. There are no negative impacts on traffic flow and safety,including parking and loading. 3. The capacity of the utilities is not affected by the project. 4. There are no impacts on the natural environment,including drainage. 5. The proposal improves neighborhood character as it improves the property. 6. The potential fiscal impact,including impact on the City tax base is positive. On the basis of the above statements of facts and findings, the Salem Board of Appeals voted five (Rebecca Curran (Chair), Peter A. Copelas, Mike Duffy,Jimmy Tsitsinos,Tom Watkins) in favor and none (0) opposed, to grant a Special Permit from the provisions of Sec. 3.3.2 Nonconforming Urex of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to allow the change from one nonconforming use of a candy factory to another nonconforming use of residential dwelling units subject to the following terms, conditions and safeguards: 1. The Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statutes, ordinances, codes and regulations. City of Salem Board of Appeals March 30,2016 Project:93-95 Canal Street Page 3 of 3 2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted to and approved by the Building Commissioner 3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 4. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction. 5. Exterior finishes of new construction shall be in harmony with the existing structure. 6. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained. 7. A Certificate of Inspection is to be obtained. 8. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Planning Board. SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1. An easement to allow shared passage over the existing driveway shall be recorded with the deed of the property. A Rebecca Curran, Chair BBBI Board of Appeals A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK Appeal from this decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of the Massachusetts General Ions Chapter 40A,and.shall be filed within 20 days of fihng of this decision in the office of the Cil* Clerk. Pursuant to the Massachusetts GeneralIa s Chapter 40A, Section 11, the Variance or Speaal Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certificate of the City Clerk has been filed math the Essex South Registry of Deedr. t City of Salem Department of Planning & Community Development RECEIVED JAN 26 2016 CHECK RECEIPT AND TRACKING FORM DATE DEPT. OF PLANNING BOARD �i gni iNI7Y DEVELOPMENT STAF CLIENT: PROPERTY ADDRESS: CONTACT NUMBER: PURPOSE FOR APPLICATION: CHECK # AMOUNT RECEIVED: $ ��^ ' City of Salem Department of Planning & Community Development JAN 26 2016 CHECK RECEIPT AND TRACKING FORM DATE DEPT. OF PLANNING & ^'+�a��rrtiiTYDEVELOPMENT BOARD_- STAF CLIENT: PROPERTY ADDRESS: CONTACT NUMBER: PURPOSEFOR APPLICATION: CHECK # AMOUNT RECEIVED: C RONAN w "V r dTMP DISRU59Fedea �COUN7 'ih' 's+s'N *"+ "'b':. I WSW+ W'64v4' k ruu, i, rwp .'W `4 le5r�,69 , Gw �w Salem A'01970 �Vm . "� ,ru rs��y , 4PAYl"U" CNV tW DA7E �/ 53-7214/2113 --------------- 1 y Y � y " e� BANK " ev "" seg wyl4 dP p �. DOLLARS rl ,u'005869n■'=,'r2i1.3P2i45�: 063Oii66Zu� Y RONAN, SEGAL & HARRINGTON ATTORNEYS AT LAW FIFTY-NINE FEDERAL STREET JAMES T.RONAN(1922-1987) SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970-3470 JACOB S.SEGAL MARY PIEMONTE HARRINGTON - GEORGE W.ATKINS III TEL(978)744-0350 FAX(978)744-7493 FILE NO.S-1259 OF COUNSEL MICHAEL J.ESCHEUBACHER January 26, 2016 t Zoning Board of Appeals f City of Salem JA 26 2016 120 Washington Street, 3`d Floor Salem, MA 01970 w u�." �Evc"'; ia7c;•1T ATTN: Erin Schaeffer RE: 93-95 Canal Street, Salem, MA Dear Ms Schaeffer: Enclosed for filing with regard to the above-captioned location is a petition together with 9 copies of the Site and Elevation Plan. Also enclosed are filing fee checks. Please see to assignment of this matter to the Board's agenda for the meeting of February 17, 2016. Very t our�, Geo W. Atkins III GWA/dap Enclosures f CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEALS PI TITI.ON FORM �" r � �. c Q CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS ' si BOARD OF APPEALS JAN 262-i �'@ty� 120 WASHINGTON STREET,3RD FLQ©R SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL o E2 MAYOR Thomas St.Pierre,Director of Inspectional Services L Phone:978-619-5641/Fax:978-740-9846 a Erin Schaeffer,Staff Planner - T, rV v> r: C)7 Phone:978-619-5685/Fax:978-740-0404 TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS 'p > The Undersigned represent that he/she is/are the owners of a certain parcel of land located at: r.� Address: 93-95 Canal Street Zoning District: B-4 An application is being submitted to the Board of Appeal for the following reason(s): This statement must describe what you propose to build,the dimensions,the zone property is in,and the zoning requirements. (Example: 1 am proposing to construct a 10'X 10'one story addition to my home located a 3 Salem Lane, in the R-2 Zoning District. The Zoning Ordinance requires the minimum depth of the rear yard to be 30 feet. The current depth of my rear yard is 32 feet; the proposed addition would reduce the depth of the rear yard to 22 feet) Applicant requests a Special Permit to change the use of the building from one non-conforming use for candy manufacturing and processing, to another non-conforming use as an eight(8)unit residential condominium with fifteen (15) on-site parking spaces. For this reason I am requesting: ( )Variance(s) from provisions of Section of the Zoning Ordinance, specifically from (i.e. minimum depth of rear yard). What is allowed is (>I?sq ft?stories? %?), and what I am proposing is (ft?sq ft?stories? %?). (X )A Special Permit under Section 3.3.2 of the Zoning Ordinance in order to change the non- conforming use to eight (8)residential condominium units ( )Appeal of the Decision of the Building Inspector(described below): ( )Comprehensive Permit for construction of low or moderate income housing(describe below): Current Property Use: Candy Factory Are Lot Dimensions Included? (X ) Yes ( )No Why? (Example:Two Family Home) , The Undersigned hereby petitions the Board of Appeals to vary the terms of the Salem Zoning Ordinance and allow the project to be constructed as per the plans submitted,as the enforcement of said Zoning By-Laws would involve practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship to the Undersigned and relief may be granted without substantially derogating from the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEALS PETITION FORM The following written statement has been submitted with this application: ( ) For all Variance requests a written Statement of Hardship demonstrating the following must be attached: a) Special conditions and circumstances that especially affect the land,building,or structure involved, generally not affecting other lands,buildings,and structures in the same district; b) Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Ordinance would involve substantial hardship to the applicant; and c) Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good, and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the ordinance. (X) For all Special Permit requests a Statement of Grounds must be attached. An application for a special permit for a nonconforming use or structure shall include a statement demonstrating how the proposed change shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to the neighborhood in accordance with Section 9.4 Special Permits. Such a statement should include reference to the following criteria: a) Social,economic,or community needs served by the proposal; b) Traffic flow and safety,including parking and loading; c) Adequacy of utilities and other public services; d) Impacts on the natural environment, including drainage; e) Neighborhood character;and I) Potential fiscal impact, including impact on City tax base and employment. ( ) For all Comprehensive Permits for construction of low or moderate income applicants should refer to M.G.L. Ch.40B §20-23. Previous-application to th-e Board-of Appeals-involving-this-property have been submitted with this petition form. The Building Commissioner can provide documentation ofprevious application to the petitioner or his representative. If different from petitioner. Petitioner: Schiavuzzo Realty LLC Property Owner: Salem Old Fashioned Candies Inc. Address: 18 Cabral Dr,Middleton,MA 01949 Address: 93-95 Canal St, Salem,MA Telephone: 781-589-57 3 Telephone: 978-744-3240 Email: Email: Signa a Signature: (Attached consent letter is also acceptable) ate: /— b Date: If different from petitioner. Representative: Atty George W.Atkins,III A TRUE Address: 59 Federal Street, Salem, MA 01970 ATTEST Telephone: 978-744-03 lSignatu Date: /— ;V' CITY CLERK DATE DPCD DATE This original application must be filed with the City Clerk. f SPECIAL PERMIT STATEMENT OF GROUNDS The existing use as a candy factory was established prior to 1965, and a food manufacturing facility is a non-conforming use in the B-4 zoning district. The applicant proposes to change to another, less detrimental, non-conforming use, as an eight (8) unit residential condominium. The proposed use conforms to the following special permit criteria established by the Ordinance: 1. A commercial use of the property is not economically feasible given the location, size, and shape of the building and lots. Also, a commercial use of the property does not satisfy the community need for housing. Creation of owner occupied residential units will provide reasonable and affordable housing for the community. 2. Fifteen (15) on-site parking spaces will adequately serve the proposed use withi safe and limited traffic flow typical of residential uses. 3. Utilities and public services will remain unchanged with the change of use. 4. The change of use will not create a change in natural environment or drainage. 5. The neighborhood character is substantially residential in nature and thus, the change of use will be complimentary. 6. The creation of a condominium will enhance the city tax base. OPID7T`-->. CITY OF SALEM LEGAL DEPARTMENT 93 WASHINGTON STREET SALEM,MASSACHUSM-N 01970 TEL,978-745-9595•FM 978-744-1279 KABSERLEY DRiscOLL ELIZABm HRENNARD,ESQ. VICTORIA CALDWELL,ESQ. MAYOR Crry SOLIQTOR A=.Cr[Y SOLICITOR D=nardno-s lem.com vcaldweU@salemcom To: Rebecca Curran,Zoning Board of Ap Ipe�s From: Elizabeth Rennard,City Solicitor Re: Opinion—Conditioning a Special Permit for 93-95 Canal Street Date: March 2, 2016 The Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) has requested an opinion as to whether they have authority to restrict a special permit use for 93-95 Canal Street to ownership only and further prohibit owners to rent? Opinion:After reviewing the relevant cases and based up the facts of this case,the ZBA does not likely have the authority to condition the approval on the units being owner occupied. I base my conclusion on the following: In CHR General,Inc.v.City of Newton.387 Mass. 351,356-357(1982),the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court invalidated a city ordinance seeking to regulate the conversion of apartments to condominiums and stated: A'fundamental principle of zoning[is that] it deals basically with the use,without regard to the ownership,of the property involved or who may be the operator of the use.' 1 A. Rathkopf,Zoning and Planning§ 1.04,at 1-21(4th ed. 1982). The city concedes,as it must,that'a building composed [of]condominium units does not'use'the land it sits upon any differently than an identical building containing rental units.' In Dowd v. Bd.of Appeals of Dover.5 Mass.App.Ct. 148,156(1977),the Court clarified that"the grant of a special permit may be limited to a particular'applicant! But the considerations on which the grant is based still relate to the land rather than the applicant." Given that the SJC has said that a condominium and an apartment"use" the land the same and that the Appeals Court has ruled that a limitation as to ownership must relate to the land, absent evidence of some identifiable special or particular impact resulting from rental as opposed to ownership, I do not think an owner occupancy restriction is permissible. Please feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns. 'P�b�� c �. ' i � ' i � Mary Ramsay Wilbert 7 Cedar Street, Unit 4 Salem,MA 01970 February 15, 2016 N e� S\••\O o cit o o d f'c S Soc,�ck-h� n Attn: Ms. Rebecca Curran,Chair Zoning Board of Appeals 120 Washington Street Salem,MA 01970 As a South Salem neighbor, I was invited by abutters of 93-95 Canal Street to attend the informational meeting held in late January with the property developer and his attorney. At that meeting, many of these abutters expressed significant concerns, with which I agree, about the proposed development. The site of this is not compatible with residential use. The MBTA commuter rail is immediately across Canal Street from this building(less than 50 feet with no intervening buildings)at the point where the train exits/enters the rail tunnel. At this point, the train is either noisily accelerating or decelerating depending on the direction of the train. There are 60 trains every weekday(30 inbound/30 outbound)from early morning until late at night. While we were meeting with the developer, two trains went by. They were so loud as to make conversation nearly impossible and each train created significant building vibration. These very frequent noises and vibrations would be significant deficits to any stable residential use on the site. Additionally,Canal Street, as is well known, is a very busy entrance corridor with significant traffic, including designation for large trucks, and a 30 mph speed limit. The proposal for 3-bedroom condominium units signifies a size either for families or dense rental housing. On such a busy roadway, this site is a particularly unsafe for vmme children- Required onsite parking would take up all of the open land around this building, leaving no safe place for children to be outside, and the nearest park is many blocks away. Students in rentals have long created problems in South Salem. �- There is no benefit to the abutting residential neighbors to have this space converted to such dense residential use. The deficits of density, rail noise/vibration, busy traffic, and absolutely no green space create tenement conditions with inevitable high rates of turnover,because any resident in such a property would wish,when able,to improve their quality of life by finding better housing. The adjacent neighborhood already has a large component of rental units with a high number of college students with whom the adjacent homeowners have experienced many problems, including frequent turnover, late night noise,and parties, etc. Creation of eight residential units in this building would require eight HVAC units on the roof, vent pipes and any number of antennas,which would be very visible to the residential a uttersT~ on�ng properties behind the building. This would be a new and very unattractive and detrimental condition for those properties. Fundamentally, Salem does not benefit from the creation of housing in substandard conditions,which are inherently unsafe and not conducive to residential use. Finally, the approval of residential use in a B4 zoned property through a special permit for non-conforming use, would defacto re-zone this property, a power that lies solely with the Salem City Council. I ask that the Board deny this application for a change of use under the Special Permit. Sincerely, Polly Wilbert Dear Members of the Board, This letter is to state that I am not opposed to the application for 93-95 Canal Street. I do have some concerns that I will share with the board for their consideration, though. When this was first proposed,the plan was to build a 3rd story on the building, and to obtain a parking variance in accordance with that. This would have been an unacceptable intrusion into the privacy of the abutters, and would have placed a significant burden on the neighborhood-which is already under constraints for parking because of the success of the businesses using the Salem Glass building. Now,with fewer units and no 3rd floor,this plan is no longer offensive. I would prefer to see a commercial use -but I realize that the building has been vacant for quite some time and that a redevelopment is likely preferable to a continued vacant building. I hope that, should this be approved, it has two major things to deal with the remaining risks: covenants restricting the use to owner-occupied properties (or strict enforcement of the unrelated tenant laws) in order to avoid the possible fate of a property bought by investors and then turned into a college rental, and also conditions that require landscaping to preserve the privacy and quiet enjoyment of the abutters on Geneva Street. They have lived with a business that was not a large generator of noise or traffic for many years, and have since been living next to an empty building.Although I advocate strongly for homes to be built that average people can afford to buy, I don't want that to be at the expense of the people who are already there. It is a difficult balance,but I am sure that the ZBA can make a decision that does so. Thank you for your consideration. Josh Turiel,Councillor Ward 5 City of Salem �oicn7r CITY OF SALEM �. LEGAL DEPARTMENT 9e�mrr8�` 93 WASHINGTON STREET♦SALEM,MASSACHUSET S 01970 TEL:978-745-9595♦PAx:978-7441279 KimaERLEY DRISCOLL ELIZAEETH RENNARD,ESQ. VICTORIA CALDWE14 ESQ. MAYOR CITYSOLICITOR ASSY.CITY SOLICITOR brennardncglem.cum vcaldweU@salcm.com To: Rebecca Curran,Zoning Board of ApIpea s From: Elizabeth Rennard,City Solicitor ��IYY�_— Re: Opinion–Conditioning a Special Permit for 93-95 Canal Street Date: March 2,2016 The Zoning Board of Appeals(ZBA) has requested an opinion as to whetherthey have authority to restrict a special permit use for 93-95 Canal Street to ownership only and further prohibit owners to rent? Opinion:After reviewing the relevant cases and based up the facts of this case,the ZBA does not likely have the authority to condition the approval on the units being owner occupied. I base my conclusion on the following: In CHR General.Inc.v.City of Newton.387 Mass.351,356-357(1982),the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court invalidated a city ordinance seeking to regulate the conversion of apartments to condominiums and stated: A'fundamental principle of zoning[is that] it deals basically with the use,without regard to the ownership,of the property involved or who may be the operator of the use.' 1 A. Rathkopf,Zoning and Planning§ 1.04,at 1-21(4th ed. 1982). The city concedes,as it must,that`a building composed [of]condominium units does not'use'the land it sits upon any differently than an identical building containing rental units.' In Dowd v.Bd.of Appeals of Dover,5 Mass.App.Ct. 148,156 (1977),the Court clarified that"the grant of a special permit may be limited to a particular'applicant.' But the considerations on which the grant is based still relate to the land rather than the applicant." Given that the SJC has said that a condominium and an apartment"use" the land the same and that the Appeals Court has ruled that a limitation as to ownership must relate to the land, absent evidence of some identifiable special or particular impact resulting from rental as opposed to ownership, I do not think an owner occupancy restriction is permissible. Please feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns. ii �I 93-95 Canal Street Residential Development in a B4 Zone Proposal Main Issues with the proposed development at 93-95 Canal Street. 7 2/11/2016 The Building does not match the current usage of the land: • B4 Business Zone DOES NOT allow any Residential Use, of any kind. • An eight-unit building would not fit with the longstanding character of our neighborhood of two-and three- family homes. • A 24-person residential building between three other ACTIVE B4 Businesses is not appropriate. • No possible separation of property lines between these four buildings as all the space between (alley)the properties is Shared Land for Vehicle Traffic • The extreme density of such a development(24+person capacity) presents detrimental conditions. • No yard, no public or private outdoor spaces. no terraces, no porches, no nearby parks. These conditions are detrimental. • How well will these condos sell? Or is the plan: Represent the development as Condos and create apartments after the project is completed. If it stays B4,this is not an issue. • Would this be a catalyst for converting all business properties in this area to residential use with similar issues? 91 Canal Street is also up for sale. • Rear of Building is only 15 feet from Property Line. This would be the smallest buffer zone between residences in the area. • 10 Vehicles will be parked abutting(facing)the back yards of residential properties on Geneva Street and Rosalynn Street with NO BUFFER. No Place to Park on this Dangerous section of Canal Street: • There are three Car Repair Businesses on this short section of Canal Street. Many vehicles under repair already occupy all extra parking spaces on Canal Street and the side streets in our area. There is NO MORE ROOM for parking anywhere in this whole area. • This section of Canal Street is DANGEROUS. The most accidents on this section of Canal Street happen on the Blind Corner two addresses south of this project. • Parking restrictions under consideration on the odd side of Canal Street to resolve the parking problems created by the automobile repair businesses would affect parking conditions on this side of Canal Street. The developer does not acknowledge this. • These pending parking restrictions are also because of the high incidence of accidents on this section of Canal Street • Recently,the intersection of Roslyn Street at Canal Street had NO LEFT TURN posted because of the high rate of accidents at this location. • The functionality of the 15 parking spaces as proposed is unlikely as their configuration is not viable,especially during winter snow, as there is no snow storage possible onsite. • Currently there are NO PEDESTIAN Crossings on this section of Canal Street. This is because it is TOO DANGEROUS to have pedestrians crossing at a Blind Corner in this area of Canal Street with a 30 mph speed limit. • A Pedestrian Crossing would become necessary because people will be parking on the Train Tracks side of Canal Street and crossing to get to this building. Adjacent B4 Businesses will be affected: • Adjacent Buildings are Businesses with industrial Manufacturing facilities. • Adjacent Manufacturing facilities have many Tractor Trailer delivery trucks every week. • These Tractor Trailers currently use the area behind 93-95 Canal Street to align the trucks with the shipping dock at 89 Canal Street. With residential vehicles parked there,this will affect that current business. •, Adjacent Manufacturing buildings will have NO-BUFFER or separation fencing of any type between the proposed residential use and the existing Industrial use. Children will be playing and using the areas behind the B4 Businesses • Buffer Zones are impossible between the Buildings because of only 15 feet of building separation and shared pavement. Other Neighborhood Problems: • The building at 93-95 Canal Street is in a Culvert. 10-15 times a year when more than 3 inches of rainfalls, Geneva Street floods. Water flows from Geneva Street to Canal Street. This Building at 93-95 Canal Street needs to remain at a lower grade from surrounding residences to prevent water from backing up onto the abutting residential properties. • Anything residents would have in the basement of 93-95 Canal Street would be subject to Flooding. • All Properties on Geneva Street and many on Hancock Street currently have water in their basements ten times a year after any significant rain or snow melt. • Air-Handling units will be on TOP of this building. All residents that Abut this project will be subject to 24 Hours a day of noise from the many central air systems. • Train Traffic. Currently 60 Train Trips a day(30 in each direction) It is VERY LOUD when trains pop through at 50+ MPH. All the buildings on Canal Street are at the forefront of this. • Currently 3 Bed room Condo's are available in the neighborhood and are not Selling. Many have been on the market for years. a 1200 Scl Feet, 3 Bedroom $120,000 2 car parking and a yard on Geneva Street has not sold in 4 years. • Fear that when the Condo's do not sell, it will become apartments,and eventually Dorms for the college. Currently on just Geneva Street there are estimated over 16 College students in just two properties. We are saturated with College Students already. Other History: • On Congress and Palmer Streets,the Keefe restaurant redevelopment project comes to mind. That development was described as a great opportunity for condo ownership in the Point and when the economy was not strong, it became apartments. FAILURE...! k r 3p RR ygjj _ � t � 44 �Y,{ .A » X pry piA F {a`4 jF[ j(r 1 yy u tk r qA{y5yC g R 1f !' #�yA'20-L # P'ktflk Yf p} r � 4�y 4 � r ll yy 44 k k 4k dl I W i �p l ��ftl!�.N` N.• �' - ��[;'.{P, ax ry, �� Ell 'd008_@'0 � � ?• ym- _ �;�c:�� -tern ",•, ; AV oak Xl '• 'max... - �r '.<.°ae���'�t`ss a C d 7jt o � � ink A$• € �I� � 3' },�4' + Pw-¢2i�@ t ttm WH41C[+e•rt•. fn H7J r P'� i F, Y, � f k���• r !� � .. r'i'u+tax e 4y#`� C� it'�� . '♦ t /at Y E . ' ' Y '? ; �� :ygZp3RgHXifllillRiilli�eX/FseONlefRliBRRnR9t0 C@' ,� r 777777 r Mwa 'rNwa a YV�M:M'P✓�'d�. R " I �/V Aga orbuf4 S7,4,6 M � - � YF � 1 xTs+ ♦,. it i ti _pL1 S .Y 5 x u 4r t eL � a t _ � � x i k Y � w :p j S ( . i a Y F r M1yx� 4 gy a� 1 f 4 f / ►� t �'FR4Y4 �:. y � f F l t�3 . ✓r 1 YI �" e G G k tic, e » , s X? § IIII i X {i 2 iz i�i� WK M Y r AMR — n, �� . �y`.� q, ..tf�a{•!�� .��P°i'`���1Ei�4#�t iffAJFdA��bt. 'j(� y i y r: x F i # I 4 .I �sl EIS �x �a 4 f'� n .p { 4 p E aa f ry e ««3g Y f � m a 9 w4- _ i � � a M�RF; SP° } � a �al *e a 4 WS ' 1 4 r p 1 _ FF, vv. YL irY'a E v F r < >a $ff x t s ` �Y" aq ! 5 ! b # x �✓-< � ..,. a Y.. �" tf4 I .k-�",i, J sf t�.y ± a g� ANOW�x ¢ "' J`.s' } St a aim � irarsr 1 N } �ffi"i, `r'..r { ���� it Y'.� .�,r�-- �k'i• � _,, a�'��-�.-.—,,.. -.•.----��-._�.� x[ w 7# _ i• xs x,r Y r , 3 - RTi Svv � h * i. ra � s � fi ,: } t� . �. ,. ,�. i '.� -'�' #' �- '':, }. x ; .i� 6,� �4 ,. .� "SSS�#1 S S x+,a t',# .. '1 .�`4tij y z,,. .� r i _ St "'.�, � � ;� `` �}�� � 0 4� _ . � � � f 659„�-� sY t� _ _ S Y.� 4 ( r � . 4( f j _ ,fir/. / r{t ���,� '� `� k x �, 1! 9° � :. �,�. .z t �+. S. '� 4� .. ..*+r., r � 'V�JiI' 3 � � •G` I .� r12 � 3h 'S4 y t aK� +a�. _ 1, .��ffia.' srEt # � 1� � "; 1 .. `� � ; ` ti\�4� C�"���4 ��V #fi � M ��� � , � r. ,��5 ��<�, �,a��r�.a -��,r .t � - '� - ..� '�'v , sy �� � _ x� rte" '� i a %a.� r °'x.. wa�... � .4,., k � � . �. 4 '. � o � m � �� i ��� } T � � ,n, ,,.}� G "/LSV IM mac.�W maf r t 1^ iRb q`t t t`Ya' as i n a.;ryure Y3 �. nN`cn 0f '�' 5 _ �a ry'}y� +a° r � ✓� ` c iia' .- 4,�` /��' T xk. S , y + )l 5. Syg ^ ?,� Yom• �r�. .. 1 •`ia4 i '� �' i s x>r # > h F 4. s y% sFy f 2i'.r. 1,... POM Y' �eYf j- +. KlyyOra k r. rryi .�} s3,x s F� § S'.�ya� � 7b«rg' �.. `pi'�yyi g y 440 fi.yJnrF "CRr 5f— .+.s* # 1'✓ �2,M +. i, -. VAN !1 Ole t. \ t "€j fir, i f `*E� r,Ans HIM ASIA I �X 4£ lotkfYSf#i yf i ' F p 9 V5, • •g*�.ax' `. wf .' a x fg Exdf'Fi iq WrT '{ LMfdl A211 'l •t t r VAR MIC v4s; Z7 MW x k 4 # ,k � ritks7tfldlN f• 7y x qY3 x ,;u,. dtdh; l , @i f _ �}xp�C fit i F4�e 4 f Arc C i�ax � {i w ira:a{r� �,{ °� }/ y '� 1 i4 4 '-Y� a'"'\•r��iti ° '^ut"kV�}�°'� } ^'��W b� R� v�•k r v°, •*t I fr'�. h *'bib 5l" ". �`.a� `� M b`'sC tit S�y � ` r � — dib t��"'y cgeiac �. '+ ^•�. 9 c.\: j�fT�k � ws+a -- P .� +k.A4,., b."",d�1'A�.4• 4 �Y�XA,4 �R~' A 4w � {�?..•« Vis ' ._ .- -- - _ i 6�¢!'., i .. a �i r i� � r t t., t —� ,,,m--^'•C�°"" ��s.}�.it 8 S } y ARA 5 24 { �} #J Wit. a _7 ..�`y�*RC�4=� �� eM e a� oas$• ® Q�'.'- ;�iid9C�ir. }me`SY , etl A k5'{lkryA e. � �°ao*e�'rfan J�nit3gr 71Eiri,w�"tl'Q� two" Gq';�� ei'a+f{\° _ .k##y 5 tr+ -: y�4� ! �w� ,,kSg9s�%w[�L%a a-�° �"°.{„ q Y aaC.�,•�.. . 6i � ..cam:: s- va ILI I MM �s�a RT4 1 at .f v7• •i✓- . - ���i�0 ,.*:.; i8 dAP yv9 p� ," XixfS�et# i gtf VzL e fit t 72 Mt `�'g \)t~ SES�� y Y r• R�y j { q � SII k k J :�e 1' a aa's ;, �•� r y�9J/fQ.�. � fk7 y IIA° , S mjr i?i��L P t . l�Ps�rL y I �� Qeat { n ug 9e � yy a. 41. v x �a 4 r - I ZONING EVALUATION FOR 93-96 CANAL ST. USE: USE: SALEM,MA 001970 'DWELLING, PARKINGLOT Zoning - B4 IMULTIFAMLY ACCESSORY US MULTIPLE.UNIELLINGHIS.PROJECT THIS PROJECT- EXISTING REQUIRED LOT#,93 LOT#95 PROPOSED LOT MINIMUL4 PERMITTED 6,000 S.F. 10.387 S.F. 1.862 S.F. EXISTING' MIN.LOTAREA WA. 1,509.0 S.F. NA PROPOSED PER DWEWNG UNIT PEfWNIT_ .. MIN:LOT MONTAGE(FEET) NO FEET81,76FEET 32 97 EXISTING' MIN.LOT WIDTH(FEET). BO FEET 81.76 FEET 32 B7.FEET EXISTING:' SPECIAL Gi"N 4 %, GR On LOT 99-8,308.OS.F:-00%LDT96'1.345.8 SF �� OD$;:. EXISTING' '.MIN.OPEN SPAGEX. .. j4fA EXISTING EXISTING' EXISTING' � BAT1sE WA 35T 210SF PROPOSED PERMIT SET FRONT AWA. 1.6 FEET EXISTING' EXISTING' SIDE mm FOOT .12TFEET EXISTING' EXISTING' REAR .25 FEET 442 FEET EXISTING EXIIII HEIGHT(FEET) MAXIMLAd HEIGHT 45 FEET 24 FEET EXISTING.: EXISTING. SEPTEMBER 22, 2015 FLOOR, `RATIO 9,554:64 SF.= - � �WA 6.98.E:0.1L PROPOSED PROPOSED PARKING PER 1:8 PARKING STALLSPER DWELLING UNIT=-12 15 STALLS PROPOSED . PROPOSED DWELLING UNIT BUILDING FLOOR 8_DWELLING- UNITS _ DISCRIPTION 93-95 CANAL STREET � 2FLO.1 MECHANICAL_EOUIPMENT UNIf#1 3 BEDROO1MS11 BATHS tosSALEM, MASSACHUSETTS, 01.970 Uhii D9 GROSOOM UNLTN2�3 BEDROO#IS/1 BATHS 1;026.13:GROSS S.F. Will3'38EDROOMS/1 BATHS 1,038.7OROSSS.F.' - UNIT#t4 3lBEDROOMS71-BATHS 1,024.34 GROSSS-F. -- - LEO SCHIAVUZZO IST FLOOR UNITff13 BEDROOMSH- BATHS% 18 CARBRAL DR: 958-68 GROSS S.F. . LIN IT02313EPRIODUS/1 BATHS MIDD�ETON; MA 01949 I,W&1300sks:F. UNIT110,30EDkOWSIT BATHS 1,038.7 GROSS 8.F. UNIT114 3 BEDROOMS11 BATHS- 1,024.94 GROSS S.F. TOTAL OF UNITS=.6. CURTIS DIBENEDETTO.AND ASSOCIATES, INC DRAWINGS LIST 233HORE RD., wwcf TEILMAolm .,,.,.amda. d Ti TITLE SHEET D 2016 ani.DiB..d.W and A..xi".INC - Tin Ar,tikl ml Works Capyigk Pmla iul Ad ARCHITECTURAL A-0.1 ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN A-1;1 PROPOSED 1ST FLOOR PLAN A-1.2 PROPOSED 2ND FLOOR PLAN A-2.0 PROPOSED ELEVATION (WESTBSOUTH) A-2.1 PROPOSED ELEVATION (NORTHBEAST) ZONING EVALUATION rs Lvl urvC _ 80.00' FOR 93-95 CANAL ST. USE: USE: 93-95 CANAL ST SALEM,MA 001970 DWELLING, PARKING LOT ` Zoning - B4 MULTIFAMLY ACCESSORY USE SALEM, MA 01970 MULTIPLE DWELLINGREQUIRED HIS PROJECT THIS PROJECT EXISTING 4v LOT#93 LOT#95 PROPOSED O 2O Q O 0 O °' 7 © OWNER LEO SCHIAVUZZO LOT 6,000 S.F. 10,387 S.F. 1,682 S.F. EXISTING MID18 CABRAL DR. MINIMUM PERMITTED 9'-0' H.P. DLETON,MA 01949 MIN,LOT AREA N/A 1,508.6 SF N/A PROPOSED LOT LINE CONTRACTOR PER DWELLING UNIT PER/UNIT MIN.LOT FRONTAGE(FEET) 60 FEET B1.75 FEET 32.97 FEET EXISTING MIN.LOT WIDTH(FEET) 90 FEET 81.76 FEET 32.97 FEET EXISTING 00 2 WAV DRIVE MAXIMUM GROUND4 777 S.F.= 0.0 S.F. EXISTING I r -3 0 COVERAGE% 80%LOT 93=8,309.6 S.F.-80%LOT 85=1,345.6 S.F. 46% 2095 N CasIgner MIN.OPEN SPACE% N/A EXISTING EXISTING EXISTING Curtis DiBenedetto and LANDSCAPE N/A 357 S.F. 210 S.F. PROPOSED R 1. D ENCLOSED ASTE Associates RECEPTACLEAREA Architectural Services SETBACKS TEMP. SNOW wwwGdeerchltecULrul FRONT N/A 2.8 FEET EXISTING EXISTING STORAGE AREA 7.3 SIDE N/A 12.7 FETET EXISTING EXISTING I I p A4Cly 12.7 FE .1 T. Pro)ecI REAR 25 FEET 44.3 FEET EXISTING EXISTING O p1TT8 `oja a Residential house addition Of new Garage,deck,and entry HEIGHT(FEET) MAXIMUM HEIGHT 45 FEET 24 FEET EXISTING EXISTING ¢ ?#M F_ INDS00111L REVISIONS DATE FLOOR AREA RATIO NIA 9,554.84 S.F.= PROPOSED PROPOSED O o ®� 0 Yd 0.98 F.R.A. - 'ARKING PER 1.5 PARKING STALLS PER DWELLING UNIT=12 15 STALLS PROPOSED PROPOSED v DWELLING UNIT I I 00 t- 7M BUILDING FLOOR M DISCRIPTI ON `- E41 C' 7o1s LOT LINEW - -BASMENT -. - -------------_ _._ _....._ __ . _.... _. __ , - _. -- - - ---- - I 0__0_ STORAGE DATE - -QIU2(115 2 FLOOR STORAGE - '- -- --- 10 SCALE AS NOTED MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT UNIT#1 3 BEDROOMS✓1 BATHS L 1,080.03 GROSS S.F. I 0 s'-0' 32.34' DRAWN BY .IRH UNIT#23 ROSSS.F. BATHS ° CHECKED BY 1,025.13 GROSS S.F. PROJ. ARCH. DD UNIT#3 3 BEDROOMS/1 BATHS 1,038.7 GROSS S.F. PROJ. MGR. UNIT#43BEDROOMS/1 BATHSI JOB NO. SMS 1,024.34 GROSS S.F. O -11 224• 79'-0' -0 1 ST FLOOR THIS DOCUMENT,THE IDEAS AND DESIGNS � INCORPORATED HEREIN AS AN INSTRUMENT OF 12 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES IS THE PROPERTY OF UNIT#13BEDROOMS/1 BATHS I CURTIS DIBENEDETTO ASSOCIATES AND SHALL O 958.68 GROSS S.F. NOT BE USED IN WHOLE OR PART FOR ANY UNIT#23 BEDROOMS/1 BATHS REASON WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED WRITTEN 1,025.13 GROSS S.F. LOT LIN _ AUTHORIZATION OF CURTIS DIBENEDETTO UNIT#33BEDROOMS/1 BATHS I 13 in 1,038.7 GROSS S.F. 00 N rse UNIT#4 3 BEDROOMS/1 BATHS 06 LO 1,024.34 GROSS S.F. TOTAL OF UNITS=8 14 PROPOSED ABBREVIATIONS ' SITE PLAN A. AB°YEFINISHEOFLOOR LOT LINE 8, 57r 15 I D.N.BOT D80170MMOF D.N. ONM DWG. DMNANG EO. EQUAL E.T.R. TO REMAIN AR O.W.B. GYPSUM GYPSUM WALL BOARD Q MIN, MINIMUM LANDSCAPE LEGEND CANAL � n / ^ 32.87 N.T.B. NOT TOSCPLE / �,•�11 O.C. ON CENTER SIM. SIMILAR a SIM.®oPP. SIMILAR AT OPc°sITE (24)EMERALD ARBORVITAE tv\l 55. TOP OFSTARLESS STEEL -WITHTHUJMULCHED LIS To. iov of WITH MULCH BED TOO TOP OF CONCRETE TOW TOP OF WALL TYR TYPICAL 2-1 "CAL PINK FLOWERING DOGWOOD(CORNUS FLORIDA V.I.F. VERIFY IN FILED O RUBRA) THE PRECEDING LIST OF ABBREVIATION IS PRESENTED AS A PROPOSED SITE PLAN NECESSARILYCONSUL GUIDE AND DOES NOTNECESSARILYSHOW ALL 1 j ABBRENATION USED.OTHER GENERALLY ACCEPTED ABBRENATION MAY HE FOUND AMONG THE DRAWINGS- Ylef"[IXWRSS 63'-12" Y .. 93-95 CANAL ST 10'-6" 10'-6" 111-0" 11'-0" 111-4" T-0" 12'-0" SALEM,MA 01970 5'-31" 15'- 1" 12' . 11-21. 15' 5i_�" ONMER LEO SCHIAVU720 2 22 6'•0" 1 - 2 2 18 CABRAL DR. MIDDLETON,MA 01949 CL .LIN CONTRACTOR BEDROOM 1 BEDROOM 2 BEDROOM 3LIVING AREA LIVING AREA BEDROOM 3 BEDROOM 2 bN � CL -v zI li? 20 Bo Archlten/Designer Curtis DiBenedetto and CL. CL. Associates Arohltsawal Services w .cdeerchiteclanet 1 ST FL. 1 ST FL. �14v 3BEDROOM 3BEDROOM 7D CL UNIT 4 UNIT 1 N li 1A� ® CL BEDROOM 1 PRled ® WD ALN Residential house addition of DP Y� O O KITCHEN m new Garage,deck,and entry m O O CL. FUL KITCHEN STAIRS UP UL REVISIONS DATE O DL. O _______ ______________. ON __ CLO O MAIL BOXES CORRIDOR V V 2 p O O CL. ___ ____ -_-_, ____ (� __ CL O J DATE A /NOT UL 00 f 00 OL SCALE AS NOTED CL. CL 4 CL § CL CHECKED BY DRAWN BY SRH 1N a BEDROOM 1 KITCHEN KITCHEN m BEDROOM 1 1N Z PROJ. ARCH. DD Y Y '� PROJ. MGR. cL. ® AD ® CL " U JOB NO. RM0215.016 to 1 ST FL. 1 ST FL. i 3 BEDROOM 3 BEDROOM THIS DOCUMENT,THE IDEAS AND DESIGNS p INSTRUMENT OF UNIT UNIT2 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES IINCORPORATED HEREIN AS6 HE PROPERTY OF rn CURTIS DIBENEDETTO ASSOCIATES AND SHALL NOT BE USED IN WHOLE OR PART FOR ANY REASON WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED WRITTEN *_ AUTHORIZATION OF CURTIS DISENEDETTO Y ASSOCIATES. b Title O 12CL. BEDROOM3 LIVING AREA LIVING AREA BEOROOM3 CL, BEDROOM2 NQ � PROPOSED § J L CL FIRST FLOOR PLAN t'tu r.r r 5'-31" 15 1. 1t, 1. 111 15'. 1. 1" 5,-31. `pnTTS r 2 2 2 1 '- 2 2 12'-0" 2'-O" 10'-6" 11'•6" 11'-6° 10'•6" 2'-0" 12'•0" T A, �1' eoarora Ala A-1 . 1 PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR PLAN =Jv y (�✓� l of 83'-1Project Address 2" 93-95 CANAL ST SALEM,MA 01970 10'-6" 101-6" 11'-0" 11'-0" 11'-4" 2'-0" 12'_0" OWNER 5' {-° 15'-21 12'- " 11 1" 15' 5'-g1" LEO SCHIAVUZZO _L 2 6'-0" 1 '- " 2 2 18 CABRAL DR. MIDDLETON,MA 01949 CONTRACTOR CL. rn Ge BEDROOMI BEDROOM BEDROOM SBEDROOM3 BEDROOM2 bN LIVING AREA LIVING AREA CL - 10Arched 10oelener zo SSoo Curtis DiBenedetto and ABBOCiatm CL. CL Archltecturel Services ww xdaarchitecte.net 1ST FL. CL 3 BUNR BOM 3 BEDROOM BEDROOM 1 7D �N Project UNIT 5 ® KITCHEN CL Residential house addition Of W'D T O O new Garage,deck,and entry ¢m FOYER KITCHEN CL. REVISIONS DATE UL R O CL. ST S WD D t- O DN --_-- vJ � FOYER " UL BATH RM ZIP CORRIDOR CL O z DATE 9/1/9015 O UL CL. 4-0 -------- – 4-- -- SCALE NOTED O O O ------ O O c1. UL 5'-0" JR DRAWN BY H CL. CL CL. CL U CHECKED BY 4 4 PROJ. ARCH. DD KITCHENS KITCHEN iN PROJ. MGR. SS BEDROOMI i BEDROOMI �, JOB NO. GMo215.016 Yq CL. ® WD VA Tp 1 ST FL. 1 ST FL. THIS DOCUMENT,THE IDEAS AND DESIGNS 3 BEDROOM 3 BEDROOM INCORPORATED HEREIN AS AN INSTRUMENT OF UNIT 7 UNITS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES IS THE PROPERTY OF HALLWAY CURTIS DIBENEDETTO ASSOCIATES AND SHALL NOT BE USED IN WHOLE OR PART FOR ANY REASON WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION OF CURTIS DIBENEDETTO ASSOCIATES. IN � SIN too THIe O BEDROOM 2 CL BEDROOM 3 LIVING AREA LIVING AREA BEDROOM 3 CL BEDROOM 2 4 N r PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR PLAN F— CL CL F 5'-4" I'4" 1 5" 1:'- 11 15 a 5'-4" No. 4810M 12'-0" 2'-0" 10'6" 11'6" 11'-6" 10'6" 2'-0" 12'-0" 33M1lA- . 764" L YH t# /'1 PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR PLAN 1re.,1.-0. �Jp (rwd 1p I��N II � XWOF INN ■ C- ■i■■ ■■■ ■'■ONIIIME ■ 0 IN MEE WIN NO mom L■■ .r-rsvz-T AN- y it �,I_ ■■I■ '�■ MEIN-I ■r■•m.r s--Nomp iZ. INN ■t■ r a i srratr t�j - 0 �_ �■�_tr fi�ri .■,- -=I- -f�Y��l=� ..■ _ _I ■ .WNW = : , _ ... -I . . _ •_ .■. I I . 'p �_i -■■ ■■■ ■IfN ■,.i�e'�ii.�■■■ -� `■�iiYdi� r""ij -�':i ■�■ ._ �:, ■■w j■rtl� 1i S t n ■ r �7 11 r■� 1 1 c '�"-r �'i ■� r �i i �Inr ..• 9 �i 41" ���t�,��� ��i��■- �■�I!i111��,III �l� 1II! j��� r�'� �Zr'•!: L� �lal! li.. Vi' I"9i, jai �1i C'>� h�♦ �irii 'ii' fii Jii� ��ii� • ,• •, ,-.. ►10/i���% i���%�i►d/ A�/ i f�li<<%n�Al/ i►tP/ i►�1/- iiO�i►J/iir��i� , ' ' . O , DATE ZC - S • ■ JRH KED BY PROJ. ARCH. rr - • • - • .. .. NOT BE USED IN WHOLE OR PART FOR ANY AUTHORIZATION OF CURTIS DIBENEDETTO ■■■ .■■ ■■'i■ ■■� ■■I ■moi■ ■■■ ■■,■ ■■■ REASON WITHOUT THE EVRESSED WRITTEN mm� ON ON NEE ON ASSOCIATES. iii iii 00 iii • , -.. - ■ ■ ■r f --.• , - -•-- �.�Y1 1ii'Rr.�-■ -YiY Tib■Y�_ PROPOSED �■ -�■ ■�' r ,,�, $= ■■ii � WE_��` iii iii �■ ■'� ii■ -■I■ '� I ■•;■ ■i- . 4 Ti■�i ■'■i�'� w■■ Rte! • a _ CLC r ■■■ i ■ fi ■ ■�■ MEIII ■■' ■ �tl■ u ■ �■r7ti ■i r-ul�iir ■■ i i � ■ ■ I ■-: i 1 ■■. I�t�ir �■ ■ ■� ■ n�� fir I ■ 1 Ir■rr r■ 1 r■ ■ ■■■ ■■■ ■■ ■'�i,■■1 ■■ r ■■�■ I�■r �r■����� ■■■ � �1 �ni��■■ � INN ICii ilii:�:'�■�■■�■� �ii'�it,i�_E E:���',fir■ i°IriIL■'■� rrri- y�--- � ■�Tiu■,�■L�i�■ Iti------■t■= Y ■n r u�rrr�i�r ■� .�r=. n■r rrralr�r■i Luiir�S■■ir�r■n■n L _� `.=r.� �r� .tri irl Iritriit � ■ ri�r■ r■n■n�l■nl�rrr ! ■!. ■■t■r r■r �- ••• !i�Li�■�r��n�!■n■�r �■r� runn�■■ n■ ■■ ■r■u ■■n■r ■ r ■■■■rrru �r,�jyir�■�r�-:t- !�!J WOMEN I . , OMER LEO SCHAI 18 CABRAL MIDDLETON,MA 01949 1 ONE - — I■ = ■ �_ ■,■. ��.,.•,`��� 0 ■■■ ■■■ ■■ ice■ ■■■ ■■'■ o ■■: ::: ROM t urtis ' iBenedetto Aimociatesm urs 9N cookand -� iT'r -ra.-i i■ ■ i'■i■ ■■ ■1■-Y s�:: -rrW-r� i '•'��� ■■ ■ •r�i ..• t.?■n_ar■.��■t�ai•riu■•_�■■•�,■��.��:t.�■��_�.�:�■�■.t_ue._■a iit l■■■ I • ■r�.::.■■._i■n•._■.�.:�,�.�i.•I�.�Ia�'.��r�iI"IiYan.�ss�i�— ■Wiii ■ �`l.I(LIL�L��I�.�m�i�t��i��t.�u.rr.-i=.i�i i!r'�■�I:■.i�i���.����O■._i�•1h. _lYu'mmit1in in.'■■i,,��aV*� � III■::■ lE�iirn���' �■:.iI■:�■:. ■ ��}�i':.•'■Y: _ additionr - Garage ' '� ! ��lIII!''"�° -•.L..� .LI ,;;;;;;;iiiiiiillll�IIIIIIIIIIII'�!�111i11i1i1111 • ' entry ,, - . IIII'l 1111111 ;•. , • =Y• r.-.� DATE q/1/2nlS SCALE AS NOTED DRAWN BY JRH BY WOJ. ARCH. '• • • ' NO. SM0215,01 • •.. THIS DOCUMENT,THE IDEAS AND DESIGNS m M malm NOT BE USED IN WHOLE OR PART FOR ANY C ■; tMEN ■■■ • .WRITTENC ■■ �■ ■■■ ■I■ ■�■■ O .• . • 1171, .■■ ■I■I■ -■■■ ■■■ ■■■ ■■� ■�■■ ■■■ ` 1 � i ■■ = i i9 ' mmmm om ■ i :i ■ ■ �i ■ ss._ -- �i�■TrY�■■�--_Y C■ ��� it ' ' ■ ■■■ ■ ■m MENMEN =r� :i: :■ i ■ won ■ 'o 9 ■ ■S�■i'� ■ice'■ Fi4" jT"� • ■'■■ ■IMl,■ ■■■ ■1 ■ ■■.■ ■■■ ■.■NEON ■.■ �' �� ■'■I■ '� ii ' ■� no 11 ��■1S■ ■■I■ .■■ '■r'L�i�ii �■'■ ■'■I■ r Z . 'i ■rt■ �1 AN I=■L■ti'■IiEN ■ •■■ '■� ��i. al.� Z.■�'■ fiTi■ ■ r■■Z ■ipi-----�'rn ■■r� r.----------■■■■■ a_ �■ ■■ ■ atr ■�■■ ■t ■■ ��----. ■■. �■ i•n;� a'■tY����itt �■.�■..■art■■..��.�■.� laa ....�....■..■�.�.%: "�t�t raa at� .t■.. ���..�..�■11■11.' ■��I F�P!III ■■LR!!!�. t ■ty■�■ iY■'��' Imno�.L !�4.�1■■tr;�art i■�'ruau��r�r��Y�n��L�1�1'.�.R�■�r4 iSg.�■� t■■•t■ i■t ■!._r1�_rt��t_�■: ! 'h p�:'�I! • — .__. Y._. aW W .•._j.Y_ 1•...Yi_ _ O --•-a a a . •- 1 - ZONING EVALUATION FOR 93-96 CANAL ST. USE- USE. SALEM,MA 001970 DWELLING, PARKING LOT Zoning - B4 MULTIFAMLY ACCESSORY.US MULTIPLE.mvumHIS.PROJECT THIS PROJECT. EXISTING REQUIRED LOT 993 LOT#95 PROPOSED LOT MINIMW PERMITTED 6,000$.F_ 10,987 S.F. 1AN S.F. EXISTING' MIN:LOTAREA WA. 1,508.6 S.F. NIA PROPOSED PER OWEWNG WR PERIUNIT.. :MIN:L07FRONTAGE"M BD FEET 81'.75FEET 3297FEET EXISTING g1N:LGTWIDTRjFEETj. 80 FEET 8/:76FEET- W-97.FEET . . EXISTING: EMDN� % 06 LO03-89B8S.FO%. OT 96- 34S4t"Mr 0109F. EXISTING% '.MIN.OPEN SPACE% HIA- EXISTING EXISTINGEXISTING' PERMIT SET LANDSCAPE WA, -35T S.F.. 210 S:F.. :PROPOSED .SETBACKS FRONT WA- 24 FEET' EXISTING' EXISTING' 403E WA7:3FOOT '12.7FfET EXISTING' EXISTING' REAR- 25 FEET .44.3 FEET EXISTINGEXISTING HEIGHT(FEEll �MAXllpp/HEIGHT 4S FEET- 26 FEET EXISTING'- EXISTING: SEPTEMBER. . 212015 FLOOR AREA RATIO95544.64 SF.- WA '0.904LA. PROPOSED PROPOSED PAMNGPER 1:6PARKINGSTALLSPEROWELUNGUNTf=�12 iSSTALI:S PROPOSED . 'PROPOSED DWELLING UNIT BUILDING FLOOR $ DWELLING UNITS - -- - - -D TION --- - - 93-95 CANAL STREET 6ASMG 2FiooR .STORAGE UMT1tt.8 BEDRODMSII BATHS MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT' 1,O6O.OSGROSS Bf. SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS, 01.970 UNiTk'3BEDROOMS/1 BATHS 1;026:13 GROSS S.F. UNIT"'3-BEDROOMS,/1' BATHS 1,038.7 GROSS S.F.' . UNIT#4TBEDRQOMSAL BATHS- i;024.34GROSSS.F - LEO SCHIAVUZZO tsrFLooR UNIT#1 3 BEDROOMSII BATHS . MINI G RQSS S.F. 18 CARBRi4L DR. UNIT923BEDROOMWl BATHS MIDDLETON, MA 01949 !'25.13 GRosS;&F. UNIT9.33.BEDROOMS11L BATHS 1;038.7 GROSS S.F. UNIT94 3 SEDROOMSII.BATHS 1,024.34 MOSS ST. TOTAL OF UNITS=-8. CURTIS DIBENEDETTO AND ASSOCIATES, INC DRAWINGS LIST 23 SHOM RP. W W LNFH1EtL-Ab 9;910 .w.omarngcenm T1 TITLE SHEET O 2015 C..mc QBawdelro aM Maov,aes,NC YAdBr TI. Wake CapjrgF Pm1wim Ad ARCHITECTURAL A-0.1 ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN A-1:1 PROPOSED 1ST FLOOR PLAN A-1-2 PROPOSED 2ND FLOOR PLAN A-2.0 PROPOSED ELEVATION (WESTBSOUTH) A-2.1- PROPOSED ELEVATION (NORTH&EAST) ZONING EVALUATION 7-0• LV I LIIVC 80.00' -0' -0' 4'e FOR 93-95 CANAL ST. USE: USE: 93-95 CANAL ST SALEM,MA 001970 DWELLING, PARKING LOT SALEM,MA 01970 Zoning - B4 MULTIFAMLY ACCESSORY USE - MULTIPLE DWELLING REQUIRED HIS PROJECT THIS PROJECT EXISTING 4 OWNER LOT#93 LOT#95 PROPOSEDr(D O 3(J 4Q 5Q fiQ m 7O LEO SCHIAVUZZO LOT18 CABRAL DR. MINIMUM PERMITTED 8,000 S.F. 10,387 S.F. 1,682 S.F. EXISTING H.P. �11.P. MIDDLETON,MA 01949 MIN.LOTAREA N/A 1,508.6 SF N/A PROPOSED LOT LINE CONTRAOTOR PER DWELLING UNIT PER(UNIT MIN.LOT FRONTAGE(FEET) 60 FEET 81.75 FEET 32.97 FEET EXISTING MIN.LOT WIDTH(FEET) 60 FEET 81.76 FEET 32.97 FEET EXISTING § 2 WAY DRIVE Im OR MAXIMUM GROUND 4,777 S.F._ COVERAGE% 80%LOT 93=8,309.8 S.F.-80% 95=1,345.6 S.F. 46% 0.0 S.F. EXISTING I N 2 0 MIN.OPEN SPACE% WA EXISTING EXISTING EXISTING Amhlmn/Ossium CwYis DiBenedetto and LANDSCAPE N/A 357 S.F. 210 S.F. PROPOSED R 1. p ENCLOSED ASTE Associates RECEPTACLEAREA Archltsdurel Services SETBACKS - TEMP. SNOW ww .edaarchitacte.nst FRONT N/A 2.6 FEET EXISTING EXISTING STORAGE AREA SIDE N/A 7.3 FOOT EXISTING EXISTING I �Q,lO E.. 12.7 FEET _ �t T8 Prole REAR 25 FEET 44.3 FEET EXISTING EXISTING O Residential house addition Of HEIGHT(FEET) new Garage,deck,and entry MAXIMUM HEIGHT 45 FEET 24 FEET EXISTING EXISTING � - I¢_ REVISIONS DATE FLOOR AREA RATIO WA 8,554.84 S.F.= PROPOSED PROPOSED I O O ®® O 0.98 F.R.A. PARKING PER 1,5 PARKING STALLS PER DWELLING UNIT=12 15 STALLS PROPOSED PROPOSED DWELLING UNIT00 BUILDING FLOOR G' M DISCRIPTION ° LOT LINEv 61-Z01V - - -- - — A -- — - - - DATE 9Iy9m5 _ -BASMENT - -..._.- . .. ... _. - - 2 FLOOR STORAGE °�°--- _ 10 ^ SCALE AS NOTED MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT UNIT3 MS/1 BATHS 1,080..00 3 GRROSSOSS S.F.SI °' 9-0• 32_34 DRAWN BY JRH UNIT.1 3 ROSSS.F. BATHS ° CHECKED H. 1,025.13 GROSS S.F. UNIT#33 BEDROOMS/1 BATHS PROJ. ARCH. DD 1,038.7 GROSS S.F. I----o --- 4g 11 PROJ. MGR. UNIT043 BEDROOMSM BATHS - I JOB NO. $Mo915.018 1,024.34 GROSS S.F. O _ AND DESIGNS 1STFLOOR O 22J 19-0• I CIORPOCRAT DT HEREIN THE AS AN INSTRUMENT OF 1p PROFESSIONAL SERVICES IS THE PROPERTY OF UNIT#13 BEDROOMS/1 BATHS I O CURTIS DIBENEDETTO ASSOCIATES AND SHALL 958,68 GROSS S.F. NOT BE USED IN WHOLE OR PART FOR ANY UNIT#23 BEDROOMS/1 BATHS REASON WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED WRITTEN 1,025.13 GROSS S.F. LOT LIN _ ASSOCIAES.�OF CURTIS DIBENEDE(TO UNIT#3 3 BEDROOMS/1 BATHS 1,038.7 GROSS S.F. 00 rue UNIT#4 3 BEDROOMS/1 BATHS C6L0 1,024.34 GROSS S.F. Lr, TOTAL OF UNITS=8 14 PROPOSED ABBREVIATIONS SITE PLAN SOT WISHED FLOOR LOT LINE 8� 5)r AL" ,5 XF.F. BOTTOM BOTTOM OF O.N. DOWN OWG. DRAWING EO. EQUAL ETA. EASTING TO REMNN A G W.B. GYPSUM WALL BOARD CANAL O MIN. MINIMUM LANDSCAPE LEGEND `(v-_Q /� /�� 32.g N.T.S. NOT TOS E ii 7 O.C. ON CENTER ♦eee��� /� I SIM. STNNLE ` ! ��! Sim,a OPP, SIMILARATOPPOSNE (24)EMERALD ARBORVITAE e�\/) I/ G.S. STAINLESS STEEL -WITHTHUUMULCHED LIS To. TOP OF WITH MULCH BED � T.OX TOP OF CONCRETE E T A O T.O.W TOP OF WALL TYR TYPICAL 2-W"CAL. PINK FLOWERING DOGWOOD(CORNUS FLORIDA V.I.F. VERIFY IN FILED O RUBRA) THE PRECEDING UST OF AGRREVIATION IS PRESENTED PSA O PROPOSED SITE PLAN GENERAL GUIDE AND DOES NOT NECESSARILY SHOW ALL 1 ABBREVIATION USED.OTHER GENERALLY ACCEPTED 1/16•=1-0' ABBREVIATION MAY BE FOUND AMONG THE SPAWNED. YNI¢CI n"¢R55 83'12' 93-95 CANAL ST 10'1 10'1 10'1 11'-0" 11'-0" 11'4^ 2'1 12'1 SALEM,MA 01970 5'_32" 15'_22" 6'0" 12' 1 11 2" 15' 5'-92" OWNER LEO SCHIAWZZO 18 CABRAL DR. MIDDLETON,MA 01949 CL. CONTRACTOR rnrn lA BEDROOM 1 BEDROOM 2 BEDROOM 3LIVING AREA LIVING AREA BEDROOM 3 BEDROOM 2 bN � CL. v r- to Aichlbd/Da"Ipnar Curtis DiBenedetto and CL. CL. Ti Associates Architisi Services w .cdaerchitecb.nei 1ST FL. 1ST FL. 3BEDROOM 3BEDROOM `Y NCL, UNIT UNIT ® WD `5N WD ® CL. BEDROOM 1 Proled T Residential house addition of UP ¢ �O KITCHEN m new Garage,deck,and entry EJE r m O O CL. F- UL KITCHEN STAIRS UP ULfl REVISIONS DATE CL. OO _______ _ ON CL. ETN CORRIDOR 1 � rn Z17-1 - DATE 5 OCL. O ---, - ----- 4� CL. O SCALE AS NOTED CL. UL 00 00 uL CL. DRAWN BY JRH CL CL 4 Z CHECKED BY ¢N PROJ. ARCH. DD j(V a BEDROOM 1 KITCHEN KITCHEN BEDROOM 1 Q PROJ. MGR. CL. ® WD WD ® JOB NO. SM0215.016 iD 1ST FL, 1STFL. ED �u THIS DOCUMENT,THE IDEASA DESIGNS 3BEDROOM 3BEDROOM INCORPORATED p UNIT 3 UNIT 2 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES IS IN HE PROPERTY OF w CURTIS DIBENEDETTO ASSOCIATES AND SHALL NOT BE USED IN WHOLE OR PART FOR ANY REASON WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED WRITTEN '^ AUTHORIZATION OF CURTIS DISENEDETTO Y '?� ASSOCIATES. io °D Ti O BEDROOM CL BEDROOM LIVING AREA LIVING AREA BEDROOM CL BEDROOM 4 Zv PROPOSED CL. FIRST FLOOR PLAN 5'1 15 2 11' 2" 1 11; 1. 15' 2^ T-31" /`pPtTTs QEF f `No- 4892 12'1 2'-0" 10'1 11'6" 11'_6" 10'1 2'-0" 12'-0" d eoerow 76'_32" t _ Am l ■ l 1 PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR PLAN t of PF01W Address 83'-12" 93-95 CANAL ST SALEM,MA 01970 10'-6" 10'-6" LL 11'-0" 111-0" 11'4" 2'-0" 12'-0" 1 1 1 1 LEO SCHIAVU=O 5'-3z 15'-2z" 6'-0" 12' " 1 " 11 2" 15' 5'-F" OWNER 18 CABRAL DR. MIDDLETON,MA 01949 CONTRACTOR E 4"IN n BEDROOMI BEDROOM BEDROOM 3BEDROOM3 BEDROOM2 bN LIVING AREA LIVING AREA CL. SIN � ArtM1sogt/Oe"Igrwr zo ao Curtis DiBenedetto and Associates CL. CL Archilec.rel Services www.cdasrchitects.net 1 ST 1 ST FL. 8IT0 M 3BEDROOM UNIT 5BEDROOM1CL UNITE pp bN led ® KITCHEN CL � WD Residential house addition of O O new Garage,deck, and entry FOYER O O KITCHEN CL. uL j REVISIONS DATE IR CL. ST S WD KV p OLLE DN FOYER RM UL CLO CORRIDOR BATH � � � Q -— _ - _ Z DATE 9l1/9015 O SCALE NOTED L O C ___ 4 _______ - CL. O JR uL 00 1 00 UL ! , DRAWN BY H CL, cL. CL. CL. U CHECKED BY 4 Q] PROJ. ARCH. DD YN BEDROOM 1 KITCHENS KITCHEN BEDROOM i PROJ. MGR. iq CL. ® WO WD ® cL JOB NO. SM0215-01h to 1 ST FL. 1ST FL. THIS DOCUMENT,THE IDEAS AND DESIGNS 3 BEDROOM r 3 BEDROOM INCORPORATED HEREIN AS AN INSTRUMENT OF UNIT 7 UNIT 8 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES IS THE PROPERTY OF HALLWAY CURTIS DIBENEDETTO ASSOCIATES AND SHALL NOT BE USED IN WHOLE OR PART FOR ANY REASON WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION OF CURTIS DIBENEDETTO ASSOCIATES. in in ap CO TXIe SIN SIN O � BEDROOM 2 CL BEDROOM 3 LIVING AREA LIVING AREA BEDROOM 3 CL. BEDROOM 2 Q N M PROPOSED q ��N SECOND FLOOR PLAN F­ CL. CL 514" 1!' 11 5" 1 '- 11- 15 64" {� ` 12'-0" 2'-0" 10'-6^ 11'6" 11'-6" 10'-6" 2'-0" 12'4p 2 11[ 11[ a m 76'-4" 4t TH pf PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR PLAN I l0 2�\5 I 1 1 u am Mal: 01 � now mom a i ii�•rrrr:::r-_7-` ti-� :so. s -rte:vr� ■"iiTii' n1f •Slil-Y��rsx.Yr srrsz- : -q.:rtrarYi .ar I ■moi■ 1= I ■■■� � ■■■ 1= rr n � 11^iul 1=1 ■■■ � =1 ■■■ � r �_ ■■■ �r ■r =1 ■■i■ � �i�-j ■■■ I=_ - ■■;■ I=PI�i' ril � �_ i ��- ■■. � -i ■�. �-tri=1=_ .�■ I -i ■ Iru ■ n i■ ■u r , r 71 I� � r 1 ► -sir �r nl� rs a.niltiii■�i Y"i7"i n.• 1 � Ir � r �'i rY •• r r an" � r ` - ..• JIhJoll GT 1►fi/ti,�i�G// t►A/ ilk// iiM�i►f�'riir��� •• • 111 1 am ■■ ■■■ ■■■ ME ■■■ ■■ .I■■ ■E■ ■■■ ME ME ■■■ ■■:■ ■'■■ ■i■■ 7 ■��■ MIN ■■.■ ■a■ ■i■�■ .■■ ■■■ .N■ ■■'■ ■■■ I ■�■■ ■■■ ■■■ a Mom ■ r . ■■■ ... ■■. ■.! ■ ?a ... I im r... ■■ L _ ... Z �■ iii i■ ■ 1 in ■■. ■■r mice' ii;n r .�■ ■■ ��r■i 1 • nl ■■■ r /r�r� 'Ell �■ ri {�i r ■ ■■■ .�I� 1 r ■ r nr ■ ■■■ ��11 ■■■ ����■��■n�l�■ rr' ■■■ a� ■■�■ .■■ 1�`al■I --, '�. In 1 r 1■ 1 1•■• rrNINON I ■ �� �i ■L�"- i�ii�i�iT9�iriirjl� ii■7� iii�ri�i"`iTinilR�n�n�n�liiltir7f■ii i �ii■7r r �r iri r �i NIMBI n.•I�naii■4 1il�i r'i I� �1 I �� ILAIIi�iir �■�Ltr' ',il■rl��� �����r�iLrrlrLr�■ul'1•�.�1r■ru�•���I�run■n•I��I��I�rN�R,i��i © ••••• :1111V ' !�G11ff&jE11I1;j • -•• as spa om ■w■ ■■■ ■�■ _ ■ti■ ■■. ..�. ■',�■ ■ ■ ■t'■ ■t■ ■��■ u ■■■ ■i■ ■�■ = i■■ ■■■ �.'� � � - ���=-� r i�-•moi-=+ ii,�iw'a 'iii ii■i sir ■. 1�==-� r=moi='i"i� =_� ii �■ � i�i; �r�,� ■� iii � ��rrTi•�i��.�i■�ri�ir�l�—'tib lei ■■■ �; ■■■ � � ■■■ �� Z' ,l iiiY �■�'4 ����!!Z,,,,,=w■■Z ■r w.��■ ■■�■ ■ ■iii■ L �- mwm ■ �� ■I■■ riil�■�'i �� si■ ! riti'i■�l■ir'=TiiiTi�}irl'� � nll j� w',■■ � ■ij■ i■ i� ■■■ l li u■■li"riinwuw■ wlY�■ ■ ■■ uwnw� u l �I m uninauu�nliui lui „— �lwri ll ■■nw■iin ■ nw� • .•• �.�.�.■■�■���w■�t■■■�l■�����1�I�rl■� J�Ili l�l,� �IIY�I�III�I�ILill ■ i �1�1113111�111011i�lyy�,.moi �.�1�■��■l■�������1� . '�%inn•niiui. •••u�iani•i ••i•uiii,••um•.rw••n7._ . , - - •..�.llq��l��lllllllllllllfi�����i���i�ll � � � � DATE A1112015 SCALE AS NQ . DRAWN BY JRH ItHECKED BY OJ. ARCH. . • • - NO. . THIS DOCUMENT.THE IDEAS AND DESIGNS I ami" M SIZE Eli 0: IN w NOT BE USED IN WHOLE OR PART FOR ANY ....... REASON WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION OF CURTIS DISENEDETTO 1w■ ■w■ C ■,■ ■w,■ ■,wl. ■■■ w■■ ■.■ C ■■�■ ■�■,■ :..■■■ ■t■ ■■■ ■■■ ■.■■ ■■■ Tik _"iif�r-zi''*- rl� i i �'++i 'iiii_ ._ sz-:rte• - r r�sra� _ -�Y i ir'L''-==" ii i■i-r'L "i-- — ate•-- -- - .. . . ■i�:.. . ■ i viii■ ■■■ ... ..■ l ... .w .r—r"�rl ... • - ■ PROPOSED ■1■ 1 ■ .�,■ �■ ! ■I 1 ■�■ .■ ■ ■ ■ ■I�■ ■�■ r r so „ ,� ELEVATIONS IN go No r� Ir:■ I ■■. 5:'�`�l'� �MIN ,.■■L••–,•`Jr■'��■r■ L■-■■ �■■ Il ■l ■�■■■ ■■■,J' .,�,�fV•�••� f■ r��■�� ����■.■i■-�-' �,�,�I�II� • .•• �'i � ��lr � .�1\����.�1�■■��1� ���l��l��l�■■■. �����f.■� .'.�1��� � w ������1■� M..li= � .I 711�II ,