Loading...
8-10 12-14 CHERRY STREET & CHERRY STREET - ZBA 8-10 CHERRY STREET 12-14 CHERRY ST k N M 1 h Legal Nofiee CrrY OF SALEM BOARD OF APPEAL 745-9595,EXT.381 Will hold a public hearing for an Pei interested in the petition sub- mitted by C&G Realty LLC/Cherry Street Realty Associates LLC requesting Variances from density regulations in order to subdivide two parcels to create a third parcel on Florence Street and to allow for two existing buildings on one of the existing parcels,and a Variance to use the Florence Street lot for a con- struction company office,to include warehousing of goods and equipment, and interior vehicle storage and main- tenance for properties at 8-10 Cherry Street and 12-14 Cherry Street,locat- ed in a R-2. Said hearing to be held Wednesday,January 17,2001 at 6:30 j P.M.,One Salem Green,2nd Floor. Nina Cohen Chairman (1/3,10) t _ J ►' € itp of baleen, Caoacfjuzett!5 CITY OF SALEM. MA CLERK'S OFFICE 360arb of fppeal 1001 MAY -8 P 3! 02 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF C &G REALTY LLC/CHERRY ST. REALTY ASSOCIATES REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8& 10 CHERRY STREET AND 12- 14 CHERRY STREET R2 A hearing on this petition was held April 25, 2001 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, Stephen Buczko, Stephen Harris and James Hacker. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and others and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. t to subdivide land The petitioner is requesting Variances from density and building per lot and a Variance to allow commercial use for the property located at 8-10 Cherry Street and 12-14 Cherry Street. i The Variances,which have been requested, may be granted upon a finding by this Board that: a. Special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect the land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other lands, buildings and structure involve. b. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioners. 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 of the purpose of the Ordinance. The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner owns adjacent properties on Cherry Street. In his petition petitioner seeks p to subdivide these properties to create a new lot and to construct a new building on the rear portion of the property, with frontage on Florence St. 2. Existing residential properties on the Cherry St. lots would not be altered. However, the creation of the new lot increases certain nonconforming features of the existing properties. With respect to the 12-14 Cherry St. property, petitioner seeks these variances: total areal 2,347 sf, lot area per unit 1543 sf, frontage 66.37 ft,front setback 6.69 ft., side setback 4.67 and rear yard setback 17.91 ft, height of building 3 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF C & G REALTY LLC/CHERRY ST. REALTY ASSOC. REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8-10 CHERRY STREET AND 12-14 CHERRY STREET R-2. 1 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF C &G REALTY LLC/CHERRY ST. REALTY ASSOC. REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8-10 CHERRY STREET AND 12-14 CHERRY STREET R-2. page two stories. In addition, petitioner seeks a variance to allow two principal buildings on one lot. 3. As to the property at 8-10 Cherry St, petitioner seeks variances from area to 12,171 sf, lot area of 1,520 per unit,frontage 64.88 ft, front 7.59, side 8.08 and rear yard setback 15.50 requirements and from building height to 3 stories. 4. On the proposed new lot petitioner seeks a variance to construct a 3900 sf building in which to house an office and warehouse for a construction company. Petitioner seeks a variance for the proposed use, and also for lot area and rear yard setback requirements. The proposed building would conform to the ordinance's requirements in all other respects. 5. Through his Attorney George Atkins III, petitioner conferred with abutters and neighbors regarding his proposal,which was initially brought before petitioner's request until the April meeting. 6. Several neighbors expressed strongly held concerns about the current condition of the lot,which is wooded and has become trash filled and derelict. In the interest of allowing the proposed improvements to take place, these neighbors offered conditional support for the petition, provided that the petitioner would undertake to fence off the residential areas from the proposed commercial lot, and provided that a landscaped buffer would be created and maintained, on their properties and on n petitioner's, to create a visual and auditory screen between the neighbors a d the proposed business.To this end, neighbors created a four-page Plan of Conditions setting forth conditions under which they would grant their approval of the proposed petition, and they drew up a Landscaping Plan, dated 4/23/01, setting forth the type and location of plantings that would form a landscape buffer between the residential and commercial portions of the properties. Petitioner reviewed the Plan of Conditions and the Landscape Plan prior to attending the meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeal, and agreed to accept each of the conditions set forth in these documents,which are incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein as part of the Board's decision in this case. 7. Among the neighbors who spoke at these meeting were Vincent Higgins of 20 Cedar St. and his daughter Michelle McNaught Higgins, Ann Marie Sobotka of 44 Cedar St., Greg Booth of 15 Porter St., Patrick Higgins, Tish O'Brian of 21 Cedar St., Louise Robinson of 24 Cedar St. and Nestor Grullon of 14 Porter Street. On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on, the evidence presented at the hearing, the Zoning Board of Appeal concludes as follows 1. Special conditions exist which especially affect the subject property but not the district in general. DECISION OF THE PETITION OF C &G REALTY LLC/CHERRY ST. REALTY ASSOC. REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8-10 CHERRY ST. AND 12-14 CHERRY STREET R-2 page three 2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship to the petitioner. 3. Desirable relief can 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. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 5-0, to grant the Variances requested, subject to the following conditions; 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statures, ordinances, codes and regulations. 2. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 3. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted. 4. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction. 5. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained. 6. Exterior finishes of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing construction. 7. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Boards or Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Planning Board. 8. Petitioner shall install landscape buffer area on his own property and that of abutters, as specified in the attached Landscape Plan, dated 4/25/01. 9. Petitioner shall install landscape buffer as specified in the attached Plan of Conditions submitted 4/25/01. Variance Granted April 25, 20011 GU ��/ � C Nina Cohen, Chairman Board of Appeal DECISION OF THE PETITION C & G REALTY LLC/CHERRY S. REALTY ASSOC. REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8-10 CHERRY ST. AND 12-14 CHERRY STREET R-2 page four 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 Laws Chapter 40A, and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 11. The Variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certificate of the City Clerk that 20 days have elapsed and no appeal has been filed, or that, if such appeal has been filed, that is has been dismissed or denied is recorded in the South Essex Registry of Deeds and indexed under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owners Certificate of Title. Board of Appeal Ll S ° L/ (,�yld RE: PETITION OFC 8 G REALITY LLC/CHERRY STREET REALTY ASSOCIATE LLC REQUESTINGNARIANCES TO CREATE A THIRD PARCEL ON FLORENC== STREET CONDITIONS _.__ Conditions During Construction -20 Cedar Street— Existing chain link fence to remain. The 6' high cedar stockade fent: will be placed on#16 Cherry Street (Muiti family dwelling) property. -24 and 36 Cedar Street— Existing chain link fence is to be removed and replaced wo i the 6' high cedar stockade fence. -20, 24 and 36 Cedar Street— The posts of the cedar stockade fence are to be place,i facing #16 Cherry Street (the multi family dwelling) and- the proposed commercar I building. The architectural side of the fence is to face 20, 24 and 36 Cedar Street. -24 Cedar Street—Existing hedge to remain. -The 6' cedar stockade fence is to have the following shape on the top of the fence: i, -Cedar stockade fence is to be placed in stable soil. This will require the hinge of U„, existing slope to be reworked. -15 Porter Street—The stockade fence needs to be added (if not there already) from ti comer of the 6 bay garages to the house at 15 Porter Street. -Hydroseed mix to be determined. Mix should be used to attempt to stabilize t►u: existing and proposed slopes. ,All proposed trees are to be mature, 1 o' tall trees. -All shrubs are to be mature shrubs. =Final placement of all trees, shrubs and mulch lines are to be verified with the proW" owners of 20,24 and 36 Cedar Street. 2 -Order of work— 1. 6' cedar stockade fence is to be installed prior to start of work on It e proposed building. 2. Trees, shrubs and mulch are to be installed within the fenced in yards of 2), 24 and 36 Cedar Street. 3. As soon as the slopes at 24 and 36 Cedar Street have been regraded It e slope is to be hydroseeded within 7 days. - Clean up- 1. Debris, waste material and scrap shall be removed by the Contractor from -.4), 24 and 36 Cedar Street on a daily basis. 2. Upon completion of the work at 20, 24 and 36 Cedar Street the ContraOor shall remove all equipment, rubbish and waste material in the area that h�s been worked and shall leave the premises and the work performed all in nc i it and proper condition. - Hours of operation 1. Work is restricted at 20, 24 and 36 Cedar Street to the hours of 8:00 am 10 5:00 pm, Monday to Friday. 2. No work shall be done on Saturdays, Sundays or Holidays. 3. At the end of each working day (including prior to the weekend).the contracic K shall ensure that the properties have a working fence line even if a te.m r���y fence needs to be installed. - Dust Control 1. The Contractor shall maintain a systematic method of dust control at all tirn,:s during Construction. - Pre Construction Meeting 1. The Contractor shall set up and attend with the property owners of 20, 24 ai 11 36 Cedar Streets a pre construction meeting. 2. . The meetirig is'to include a site walk and address start dates of construction, schedule layout areas and.all issues regarding construction. 3. The meeting shall be held no less than 1 week prior to start of a"y construction, delivery or storage of materials or equipment, or any work o l site. - Plantings at 20, 24 and 36 Cedar Street 1. All plants provided and installed shall be individually tagged prior to digging. 2. Property owners at 20, 24 and 36 Cedar Street to inspect trees and before they are installed on their. property. if the property ( ) ' .. dissatisfied with the condition of the planting(s) the Contractor shall replso. the tree(s) and shrub(s) in question immediately. 3 3. All trees and shrubs shall be planted within 5 days of arrival on site or str.ill not be used. 4. Container grown shrubs stored on site shall be shaded from direct sunlight at all times and shall not*be stored on paved surfaces. 5. Plant pits shall be excavated according to industry standards. 6. Planting soil mix shall be provided. ~ 7. Loosen the perimeter roots on the rootball of all container plants prior •.o planting. 8. Remove plants from their containers immediately before planting. 9. Handle plants carefully to prevent damaging roots. 10. Place each plant in an individual hole and firm the loam around the roots. 11. Water thoroughly and mulch. 12. Fertilizer tablets should be added after the plant has been placed in the hole.. 13. AM plants shall be watered immediately following planting. 14. Contractor to maintain all new plantings for 60 days following the completi;n of all plantings on the individual properties of 20, 24 and 36 Cedar Street Maintenance of the new plantings will consist of keeping the plants in a healthy growing condition. This is to include watering and anything els e necessary to keep the plants healthy. 15. The contractor shall remove plants that die during the 60-day maintenanc e period within one week of receiving notification from the property armor during the growing season. 16. All trees and shrubs at 20, 24 and 36 Cedar Street shall be warranted by the Contractor for a period of 1 year. Plants found to be unacceptable by tr e property owners of 20, 24, and 36 Cedar Street shall be promptly remmi d from the site and replaced immediately if during the growing season or duri. g the next normal growing season. Reference and attach plan indicating agreed upon items. Number of planting - The construction conditions must reference the agreed upon site plan including we date. 4 Permanent Conditions -Tree Damage on Developer's property 1. Any of the trees, that are Proposed or are to remain located on ilia developers properties: a. Which become damaged must have corrective maintenanim action taken immediately. b. Broken limbs shall be Pruned according to industry standards. . c. Trees that are damaged irreparably must be replaced by the Contractor with mature trees of the same type or similar whwh are at least 10' tall: The trees will be replaced within 30 days if being notified. is to remain) located at#16 Cher-y d. H the existing willow tree Pat Street is damaged irreparablyLinden and 1 ma re— 1replaced with:n mature- 10' Little Leaf Hemlock. e- All new trees shall be spaced 12'-15'on center. - Stockade Fence on Developers property 1. Fence is to be maintained in good working condition. Repairs to Hie fencing will be made immediately upon notification that repairs ; a necessary.This will include but is not limited to removing graffiti. 2. If the fence is need of replacement the fence shall be replaced with ilie same type that was agreed upon in the conditions during construction. _ The permanent conditions must reference the .agreed upon site plan includisig the date. r ------------ goMrs.Louis Robinson " '{,-�"°'F. r S • 9A �� � 24 Cedar St `•' Salem MA 01970-4837 o r �) 1 ... .. ... .. . 1 HIN HH: ill i III It 1 1 Ill (Mi i a4- s4 ZL �JIAI - -moi Oz- 7VV fill $ r�� zQ � 8�< p -ail sill IL � � Nina Cohen, Chairman Board of Appeal City of Salem Salem, MA April 23, 2001 RE: PETITION OF C & G REALITY LLC/CHERRY STREET REALTY ASSOCIATES LLC REQUESTING VARIANCES TO CREATE A THIRD PARCEL ON FLORENCE STREET On 1/17/01 the Board of Appeal of the City of Salem held a hearing on the petition of C & G Reality LLC/Cherry Street Realty Associates LLC (the petitioners) requesting variances from density in order to subdivide two parcels to create a third parcel on Florence Street and to allow for two existing buildings on one of the existing parcels, and a variance to use the Florence Street lot for a construction company office, to include warehouse of goods and equipment and interior vehicle storage and maintenance for properties at 8-10 Cherry Street and 12-14 Cherry Street R-2. As longtime residents and property owners of Salem with a stake in this community and our neighborhood we are against subdividing the two parcels to create a third lot that would have a variance to use the Florence Street lot for a construction company. We are prepared to bring this issue before the Salem City Council if the Board of Appeals does not enforce our rights as property owners. We have met with the petitioners and their counsel on four separate occasions and have had over a dozen phone conversations with them to review and discuss their plans for this development. We are against this proposal based on our review of the plans, City Zoning Ordinances and our discussions with the petitioners due to the severe impacts of the proposed development of this property on our residences and neighborhood and the refusal of the petitioners to provide long term maintenance of the visual buffers in the conditions of the special use permit. The Zoning Ordinance of the City of Salem specifically excludes a project of this type on an R-2 Zone and is contrary to public interest and should not be allowed to be developed. The following Zoning Ordinances of the City Of Salem, Massachusetts clearly indicate that the proposed development is specifically excluded from a R- 2 Zone (of which the proposed development and the surrounding residential homes are included): - Article V, Section 5-3.c.6-14 Special Use Permit Specifically Excluded from the R-2 Districts. Special use permit specifically excluded from this category include: 2 • (6)All special permit uses specifically excluded from R-C and R-1 Districts: Rooming and boarding of persons not in the family, Automobile service stations. •(9)Any special permit uses for B-1, B-2, B-4 and I Districts:Professional offices; off street parking and loading facilities; automobile service stations; warehousing and distribution;general office building;automobile, trailer, and boat service;plumbing, carpentry and sheet metal shops, sale and storage of building supplies; warehousing, general storage; and warehousing and wholesale distribution uses. •(10)Automobile service stations. •(12) Multifamily dwellings. •(13) Sale of motor vehicles trailers boats and service for the same. Article Vlll, Section 8-1(b) Intent. Nonconformity shall not be enlarged upon, expanded or extended nor be used as grounds for adding other prohibited structures or uses elsewhere in the same district. Article VIII, Section 8-2(3) Nonconforming lot:If two (2) or more lots, or combination of lots and portion of lots, with continuous frontage in single ownership and if all or part of the lots do not meet the requirements for lot width and area as established by this ordinance, the lands involved shall be considered to be an undivided parcel for the purpose of this ordinance, and no porton of said parcel shall be used or sold which does not meet lot width and area requirements established by this ordinance, nor shall any division of the parcel be made which leaves remaining any lot with width or area below the requirements stated in this ordinance. Article V111, Section 9-5(a) Variances: In authorizing, upon appeal or petition in specific cases, a variance from the terms of this ordinance, the board of appeals shall determine that such variance will not be contrary to the public interest and that owing to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the provisions of this ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship. The following outlines some of our objections: - Our property values will decline significantly by allowing a commercial building as proposed in a residential zone. Commercial buildings are strictly prohibited in an R-2 Zone. - Our current view of the extensive tree line that serves as a visual buffer to nearby commercial buildings will be removed and replaced with a view of the proposed building as well as a view of the other commercial buildings in close proximity of Florence Street and across Canal Street to Riley Plaza. From the 3 information provided by the petitioner it is our understanding that many of the existing trees that currently provide a visual buffer will be removed as part of the construction (excavation and grading) of the proposed commercial building. The petitioner refuses to provide as a condition of the special use permit long term maintenance and replacement if necessary of the trees that act as a visual buffer. The Petitioner states that an office will be kept at the proposed building. Office buildings are strictly prohibited in an R-2 Zone. Noise and dust generated during construction will be too close to our homes. Slopes currently have grading, drainage and erosion problems. Slopes at Cedar and Porter Streets are currently very steep; the proposal will impact erosion on all slopes due to the refusal of the petitioner to provide long term maintenance of the trees and slopes as a condition of the special use permit. Lighting of proposed commercial building and the adverse lighting effect from other commercial buildings if the existing trees as proposed are removed by the developer. Even though the developer has proposed to replace some of the trees, without a long term maintenance agreement our rights as property owners will not be protected. We will lose our visual buffer. Noise from equipment and operation of a proposed construction company office, including warehouse of goods and equipment. The hours of operation will begin early in the morning generating noise and dust that will affect our homes. Heavy equipment will be stored and used, as is common practice with a construction company. The noise and dust will be transmitted up the slope to our residences. We will have no control over the hours of operation or the equipment that is stored there. All of the petitioners proposed uses of this property are strictly prohibited in an R-2 Zone. Exhaust fumes from equipment and vehicles from proposed construction office will be too close to our homes and is strictly prohibited in a R-2 Zone. The petitioner stated that construction vehicles and a boat will be kept and maintenance performed on the vehicles and boat at the proposed building. Maintenance of construction vehicles, equipment and boats is strictly prohibited in an R-2 Zone. Maintenance of the equipment to be performed on site and the disposal of the resulting hazardous waste is a major concern due to the proposed commercial facility's proximity to our homes and is strictly prohibited in a R- 2 Zone. 4 On site storage of fuel and oil for the equipment that will be located too close to our homes and strictly prohibited in a R-2 Zone. The petitioner has stated that construction materials and equipment will be stored at the proposed site. Storage of equipment and building supplies are strictly prohibited in an R-2 Zone. Drainage of the proposed commercial building will impact adjoining properties. Possible improper slope drainage may result in slope failure of adjoining properties. Lack of long term slope erosion control and grading will severely impact adjoining properties. The two existing lots, which house multifamily buildings, that are owned by the petitioner, do not meet current zoning requirements. The code strictly prohibits nonconforming lots from being used as grounds for adding other prohibited structures. The proposed subdivision of a portion of two (2) lots into a third lot will leave all three (3) lots not meeting multiple zoning ordinances. The zoning ordinances states that fftwo (2) or more lots, with continuous frontage in single ownership and if all or part of the lots do not meet the requirements for lot width and area as established by this ordinance then no portion of the parcel shall be used or sold which does not meet lot width and area requirements established by the zoning ordinance, nor shall any division of the parcel be made which leaves remaining any lot with width or area below the requirements stated in the zoning ordinance. This proposed development has severe impacts to the residents and property owners of the City of Salem who live near it. We believe that the requirements of the surrounding neighbors must be given priority when determining what development is allowed to occur within the City of Salem in a R-2 Zone, especially developments that call for changing the use of residential zones into commercial uses and eliminate buffers to commercial zones. The petitioner should not be allowed to reduce these requirements simply for economic gain and the adjoining property owners' economic loss. The petitioner has yet to identify or validate his unnecessary hardship if there is any. The petitioner currently has three (3) multifamily dwellings on two (2) lots, how does this constitute a hardship? The 5 multifamily dwellings in the R-2 Zone are grandfathered and do not meet requirements of existing zoning laws. No landowner should have the right to develop every section of their property at the detriment of their neighbors and violate the multiple zoning ordinances stated above. This development, as any development that occurs within our city, should be a model of overall balance with nature to enhance our community not detract from it. We believe that this balance must be maintained and that this development and the elimination of a buffer area must not be allowed to occur. The Board of Appeals has the responsibility placed on it per the City of Salem Zoning Ordinances (Variance Section 9-5) to determine that the variance proposal is contrary to public interest. We thank you for the opportunity to provide comment on this proposed development and hope that all of our concerns and property owner rights as residents of the City of Salem will be properly addressed and that you as our representatives will not allow this development to occur as it violates the City's Zoning Ordinances that were enacted to protect our rights as homeowners and residents of the City of Salem. Sincerely, The undersigned residents g ed es dents of Cedar, Cher and Porter Streets Please see attached Cherry ( pages) Cc: Mayor Stanley Usovicz, City of Salem Kimberly Driscoll, Ward 5 City Councilor Deborah E. Burkinshaw, City Clerk John Keenan, City Solicitor, City of Salem Nina Cohen, Chairperson Zoning Board of Appeals Sally Murtagh, Zoning Board of Appeals Attorney for the Petitioner, George Atkins Sincerely, The undersigned residents of Cedar, Cherry and Porter Streets NAME ADDRESS 0 .2 1 7ka-L"W-Tp "'e'v i mss^ P" f -� - vN f �. v�0 P r ILJlQD E�� 36 sw g4— , Lwv r wv LEGEND EXISTING LOTS PROPOSED LOTS © y REFERENCES: oO - x Lot A Iron Pipe � Map 34 Lot 99 11,386 sq.ft. 1) Deed Book 14045 Page 589. 17,948 sq.ft. 2)_ Deed Book 16340 Page 424. Hydrant q• 3 Plan Book 201 Plan 55. Lot B 4) Plan Book 11 Plan 35. 12,171 sq.ft. 5) Plan Book 63 Plan 50. -a- Telephone Pole W/Light Map 34 Lot 98 17,956 sq.ft. Lot C W Woter Valve 12,347 sq.ft. M E Sewer Manhole WVl k Telephone Pole WV NA Cos Curb Stop CB Catch Basin Bound • Tree CS D4 Os ,! �a Porter Street o Mop 34 Lot 102 N/F William P. Wilson 5 Florence Street I 1 CB Book 13933 Page 597 - Map 34 L t 101 Map 34 Lot 100 N/FConcrete Block 1 Story Steven J. Booth Ernest J. & Dorothy A. Fortin o . Concrete Block 15 Porter Street 2 Cherry Street o0 1 Story y Book 12434 Page 326 `o Book 11471 Page 301 o - 0.94, F -4 . I` 55 9'x1g 88.32 5. 4 L 50' ___ 8.08' --- Q) (Typical) / J� �` S8 5 4^ / 1 2 4 • (/ / \ 189.81' S 6 7 8124 126--- Map 34 Lot 103 U) e \\ NSF / Florence Street Realty Trust 7.59' Leonard J. Samia, Tr. U Lo A • ^ Existing 7 8 9 10 11,3 6 sq.ft 1 Bit. Conc. Proposed Florence Street q • ( • v 6 Bay Pqrking #8 3 Book .915 Page 151 \ I I (o Garage 9x19' 3 Sty. v I Iv L (Typical) Dwelling 15.50' o a v CO 0 00 roposed .36' 0 -LLJ p1 3900 sq..f / wilding / 12,171 Bq.ft. Q) n / Cdr, ,n 9 • 10 I I G 15.50' z 585.44 07"E 4.67' 1 Bit. Conc. 19.73' �. PLAN OF LAND / • / 0.312 11 87.2 — / IN 10 8 — " oi 72 0 o �' 9 7 6 5 4 3 2 v SALEM, MA 9'X19' ( nicol) \ 13 m #12 6.69' Prepared For 4 13.65' 1 / -0: 13.86' 3 St y. Bit. Conc. / Dwelling David ' Carne vol e #16 . #14 i `M° 354 ' Prepared By , 3 Sty. o �q. hm� � 7 -- / 17.91° Dwelling CO Lat c Vernon J. LeBlanc, PLS ,2,347 sq.ft 161 Holten Street ��^� N7g 5 3�0 W 17.99 1 Bit. Conc. No.3M 2.76 Dan vers, MA 01923 A°- €e �s"'v 173.91' 2 i 9'x22' _ Waosu � 166.70' t � N8 5.58 5'49'41^W I (978) 774- 6012 !•4• f 9 5.31' ' �1t_ Map 34 Lot 94 Mop 34 Lot 95 Map 34 Lot 97 Map 34 Lot 93 „ , N/F NSF Vincent W. & Joanne R. Higgins James Perkins Sounders November 27, 2000 Scale 1 = 20 St. George Parish Realty Trust Louis 24 Cedar ine Robinson gg Clinton D. & Clestorine Madden, Trs. 20 Cedar Street 18 CherryStreet Book 5673 Pae 58 Book 5673 Pae 391 36 Cedar Street Book 6318 Page 533 9 9 t Book 12027 Page 254 HOR. SCALE IN FEET 0 20 50 100 i •