##VIDEO ID:HyTF3oFpKDI## test one two good evening welcome to the r zoning board of appeals if everyone could please stand and salute the flag pledge allegiance to the flag the United States of America to the repic stand God indivisible andice welome the members of the zoning board of appeals Mr lemina here Mr Lopes here Mr O'Brien here here Mr Pelton here here miss Pratt the alternate member here and chairman Tucker here here quum is present first application is a 2422 1784 Holdings LLC Scottsdale Arizona requesting a sixth-month extension of the one-year exercise period from the zoning board of appeals associated with the granted variances of a 2327 to enable the appellant to raise the existing garage facility and Associated structures and construct a new five-story self storage facility with Associated parking pedestrian access and vehicular access drives at 195 americ Legion Highway is the applicant present please press a microphone state your name and address for the record please my name is Larry beels I'm with Beals Associates two Park Plaza Boston Mass you wish to add anything this is pretty much self-explanatory so well I I came with a long presentation I've got a PowerPoint but as I began to look at it I thought you know the project as well as I do and I can either just summarize some succinct points but basically uh we need a little bit more time to finish the project okay it's a six-month extension I'll ask if there's any proponents anyone in favor seeing in here and I I'll close that side of the hearing any opponents anyone opposed seeing in here now I'll close outside of the hearing any members wish to speak to approve there's a motion on the floor to approve a six-month extension keep in mind that's all you get you if after that you'd have to reapply and everything I I appreciate the encouragement thank you okay I'd ask for a roll call please shall the zoning board of appeals Grant a sixth month extension for 195 American Legion Highway Mr lemina yes yes Mr Lopes yes yes Mr O'Brien yes yes Mr Pelton yes and chairman Tucker yes yes the time extension has been granted thank you next application is a 2423 this is a special permit on the application of Cody Gardner 193 rice AV requesting a special permit from the zba pursuant to R revised ordinance section 17440 to enable the appellant to modify an existing non-conforming two family structure by constructing a 566 ft addition at 193 rice AV is the applicant present okay please step up to the microphone stage your name and address for the record uh Cody Gardner 193 rice Avenue R my name is Michelle ashkar I'm with ashar engineering surveying place of business 70 Washington Street uh site 306 havil Mass okay do you wish to add anything or does the application speak for itself pretty much the application speak for itself I'm just here to answer any question that will arise from the board okay seeing that it's a public hearing I will ask if there's any proponents anyone in favor if you kindly just have a seat and hi I didn't even see hi um Angela Gino sa award five counselor um Rebecca godner has been a lifelong member of the point of Pines um she's lived there her entire life her and her husband are expecting Twins and I would have no problem supporting an addition to the home where she grew up to raise her children there and I have not heard anything from any of Butters um negatively in reference to this so I have no objections thank you thank you are there any other proponents seeing and hear and none close that side of the hearing any opponents seeing and hear and none close that side of the hearing any members wish to speak motion to approve there's a motion on the floor to approve ask for a roll call please with our standard conditions the Zoning Board of appeal standard conditions are as follows if the rights authorized by this special permit are not exercised within two years of the date of the grant of this special permit the right shall lapse this special permit should not be valid until the appellant has recorded this V this special permit and plan in the sea County registry of deeds and submits document recording numbers and dates to the city clerk and building inspector of the city of Rivier and the appellant must receive cyan review approval prior to applying for a building permit shall the zoning board of appeals Grant the special permit subject to those conditions Mr lemina yes yes Mr Lopes yes Mr O'Brien yes yes Mr Pelton yes yes and chairman Tucker yes yes the special department has been granted next application is A2 2424 zap Development LLC 78 Mill Street Middleton requesting a variance of R revised ordinances section 17282 with respect to minimum parking requirements for apartment use in the GB District to enable the appellant to construct a 48 unit residential apartment building with 42 parking spaces at 791 Broadway e hi Mr chairman members of the board my name is mar zapar I'm here for 791 Broadway it's a 48 unit building approved with 50 parking spots I'm here today to ask for a variance to remove the parking stalkers from this development right now the parking with the 50 stock it has 50 spots with the 42 parking spots eight are stockers we have 36 one bedrooms eight Studios and four two bedrooms so the six studios are not going to have parking when you're going to put in the lease and make sure they don't get a sticker on the city okay any anything else we wish to provide or no seeing that this is a public hearing I will ask if there's any proponents anyone in favor W counselor wish to speak good evening again Mr chairman and members of the board um when I got the phone call from Mario letting me know that he wanted to get rid of the stackers I was a static because I believe that they are dangerous stackers create a lot of headaches when they are not maintained properly and they're very difficult to maintain uh we've had this conversation before learn um people need to learn how to operate them properly and they can't do that at times and if your vehicle get stuck then you're stuck and that means every car that needs to get out after you is stuck so you're creating a ton of traffic um that happened to me and my mom in Boston um not to mention that if you have an electric vehicle and an electric vehicle where to catch on fire it could be deadly um fires are very difficult to extinguish in an electric vehicle as everybody knows because they keep relighting imagine if your cow was stuck on top if the staff would get stuck that would create a huge traffic jam and if one person can't get out neither can anyone else stack is a noisy which would be annoying to the residents that actually live there or the surrounding residents I have spoken to neighbors um that were for for removing them and against removing them uh but most of the people that I spoke to that were against were worried about parking now I was just on the phone with the director of parking and that's not going to be the case if the developer has granted the removal of these stackers there will be no parking issued to no parking um for a point of clarification they couldn't get stickers the last time exactly they can't they will not be able to get a sticker nor a visitor parking um as well um when he purchased this he purchased it with the stackers he does not want them um the apartment building doesn't have any three bedrooms it only has a couple two bedrooms a single one bedroom and then Studios it's right on a bus route and the amenities all are all around it they're all in walking distance um the the developer also has agreed that he will put in the leas that the person moving in will not have a vehicle so I feel confident and I feel comfortable allowing these stackers to not happen because I again I do not like them and I Rec I recommend that this honorable body give him the variance thank you thank you any other proponents seeing and hearing n any opponents anyone opposed please step up to the microphone state your name and address for the record please good evening Mr chairman and members of the board my name is Christine Robertson I reside at 187 charger Street here in Rivier I just want to make a point the point is if you give this variance how about all the other apartment buildings that have already put in for stackers and have been approved you're setting a precedence by allowing this variance and I think you need to give that some thought thank you there any other opponents anyone else opposed seeing in here not all close that side of here any members wish to speak is there a motion yeah I have a motion to approve motion to approve with that would have our standard conditions along with the lease restriction as well as no visitors parking or residential parking the Le restriction well that's them they said it that's not us but okay yeah the standard zba conditions uh to be added to the decision if approved are as follows if the rights of this variance are not exercised within one year of the date of the grant of this variance the right shall lapse this variance shall not be valid until the appellant has recorded this variance in plan in the seoc County registry of deeds and submits document recording numbers and dates to the city clerk and building inspector of the city of reier the appellant must receive site plan review approval prior to applying for a building permit and this property shall not be eligible for participation in the city of River's residential and visitor on Street permit parking program shall the zoning board of appeals Grant the relief requested subject to those conditions Mr lemina yes yes Mr Lopes yes yes Mr O'Brien yes yes Mr Pelton yes yes and chairman Tucker no no the variance has been granted next calendar member next application is A2 2425 bicin Investments LLC 407 Proctor a Riv requesting the following variances of the riv revised ordinances to enable the appellant to subdivide existing lot 557 at 87 Derby Road into new proposed Lots lot a Derby Street and Lot B Derby Street I'm sorry Derby Road let just say Derby Road for the purpose of constru constructing a new single family dwelling on proposed Lot B Derby Road Rivier Mass Riv revised ordinance section 17241 with respect to minimum area requirement of 8,000 square ft within the RB district for proposed Lot B and section 17241 with respect to minimum Frontage requirement of 80 ft for proposed lot a minimum front yard setback requirement of 20 ft for the proposed structure on Lot B proposed Lot B and minimum rear yard setback requirement of 30 ft for the proposed structure on proposed Lot B and maximum principal building coverage requirement of 30% for the proposed structure on Lot B good evening stage and am uh good evening chairman and members of the board uh my name is Nancy O'Neal I am an attorney uh with d Ambrosio LLP located at 14 Proctor Avenue I'm here tonight on behalf of the applicant billin Investments LLC owner of 87 Derby Road and I am joined here tonight uh by Mr Richard Damiano of bicin Investments a city orav resident as well as our architect Mr John Lloyd of JPL Consulting The Proposal here tonight is for the subdivision of the 87 Derby Road property uh which is a large corner lot into two lots uh we recently submitted plans uh that confirm the dimensions and Architectural elements of the reposed project uh which we also have printed here uh so the 87 Derby Road Lot uh while a large lot has a unique unique shape uh with six sides and an irregular corner at the intersection of Derby Road and Grover Street uh the challenging shape of this lot complicates the division of the lot as well as the placement of buildings and a pertinent parking areas uh so this proposal is for the division of the lot into two modest Lots the first lot being around 8,300 Square ft uh which is sufficient in the RB District where the property is located on the second lot being around 4,300 Square ft uh which is under sized for the RB District but similar in size to neighboring Lots uh as this is a lot Division I would just like to highlight that sufficient access uh to each property exists uh so this lot is particularly well suited uh to a subdivision of this type as the existing two family uh has two driveway and the new single family uh would be a corner lot with a large sidey yard so no problems with access would exist uh but to get into the specifics of this proposal uh the first lot the 8300t lot would contain the existing two family residents uh with the requisite for parking spaces no changes are planned uh to that residence uh as part of The Proposal the residence would remain a twoam with four parking spaces uh the second lot the 4,300 Ft lot uh would contain a new single family residence uh with the requisite two parking spaces uh located in a two-car garage uh so the proposed single family residents uh which you can see here has been oriented towards uh Grover Street uh so it it has been oriented that way uh to maximize setbacks from Neighbors as well as uh maximize the distance from the intersection of Derby and Grover uh for driveway safety purposes so overall we are proposing a modest single family home around uh 2,300 ft uh with sufficient parking that is being oriented away from Neighbors uh the existing two family uh which has sufficient parking is not being changed uh so we do not expect any uh parking traffic or neighborhood impacts here uh the new single family home fits with the size and scale of the neighborhood as you can see here uh it is an attractive new residence that would take the place uh of an underutilized uh large side yard and in today's housing crisis the creation of new a non- impactful family oriented housing such as this uh is particularly important and for these reasons we would uh respectfully request that the zba approve the variances uh to allow this worthy project to proceed to construction and we are happy to answer any questions that you may have thank you thank you seeing this to public hearing are there any proponents anyone in favor seeing and hearing none all close outside of the hearing any opponents anyone opposed seeing and hearing none all close outside of the hearing any members wish to speak attorney come up here for a second I show you something I'm a little confused here that's the existing over there right cor this is the proposed single cor this is the proposed no this is could you ask the question on the mic is this beuing the garage in the back right where that garage is I wanted to know if that cuz that says 4300 4364 Square ft but then I see a wall where the proposed single family is but that's one big lot that's just a side yard uh so this this space between uh the the part of the structure Gage uh if I put it that way is that better okay so uh here here's a single family this would be the new lot line over here uh so then we have the proposed single family a two-car garage behind and then this this entire area this would be the sidey yard with a 39 ft set back back to the neighboring property and this freestanding garage over here that's an older structure that would come down okay yeah so it's just one one single family this area would uh this wouldn't be occupied by any structure this would just be a yard okay thank you my only comment is just that I'd like the um parking spaces on the plan depicted with the sizes before you if you were to have this voted on please have that done before you submit the plan to the registry of deeds that's all motion to approve on the floor as for a roll call with our standard conditions the standard conditions of the zba are as follows if the rights authorized by this variance are not exercised within one year of the date of the grant of this variance the right shall lapse this variance shall not be valid until the appellant has recorded this variance in plan in the sea County registry of deeds and submits document recording numbers and dates to the city clerk and building inspector of the city of Riv and the appellant must receive site plan review approval prior to applying for a building permit shall the zoning board of appeals Grant the relief requested subject to those conditions Mr lemina yes yes Mr Lopes yes Mr O'Brien yes Mr Pelton yes and chairman Tucker yes yes the variance has been granted thank you thank you next application is A2 2426 Sher Murray for 41 Irving Street Rivier Mass requesting a variance of Riv revised ordinances ordinances section 17 24010 y with respect to maximum height requirement of 30 ft to enable the appellant to construct a second floor with a walkup finished addict attic on an existing two family dwelling at 41 Irving Street good evening Mr chairman my name is attorney Larry Simeone I have Law Offices a 300 Broadway site 4 in um a Broadway Rivier um this evening I represent Sharie Mari and her mother who are the owners of the property 41 Irving Street they seek a variance and and variance deals with their particular project their project uh we'll start off with the property the property consists of lot 261 which is 4,000 square ft the lot depth is 100 ft and the 40 ft uh of Frontage the property also is a two- family an existing two family home with 1.5 uh floors the project uh seeks a variance to allow the owners to add two um two a second floor with a walk-in unfurnished attic which is depicted in exhibit two uh and shows as uh exhibit a 2-1 the proposed addition proposed addition is 32 feet as um the existing lot is less than the 5,000 square ft required by 17241 010 y um it cannot U meet the zoning requirements and therefore needs a variance wherein the project now has a proposal before this honorable body of 32 ft essentially looking at the project itself the respect the respecting enforcement of the provisions herein is the failure on the part of the applicant to comply with 17 24010 Y which is directly related to the tography of the conditions set forth above the applicant argues that should the variance be the variant should be granted there shall be no change to the neighborhood the appellant argues that given these facts as a result of the granting of the variance that will be without substantial detriment to the public good wherein the existing dwelling shall be in compliance with the existing use regulations in the ob2 district and the failure on the part of the applicant to comply with 1724 010 Y is directly related to the topography conditions set forth above the the appellant argues that the granting of the relief shall not nullify the substantial or substantially derogate from the intent and purpose of the zoning bylaw say any questions Mr chairman you any memb have thank you seeing that it's public hearing are there any proponents anyone in favor seeing and hearing now I'll close that side of the hearing any opponents anyone opposed seeing and hear not I'll close that side of the hearing any members wish to speak motion to approve on the floor with our standard conditions roll call please standard conditions are as follows if the rights authorized by this variance are not exercised within one year of the date of the grant of this variance the right shall lapse this variance shall not be valid until the appellant has recorded this variance in plan in the suff County registry of deeds and submits document recording numbers and dates to the city clerk and building inspector of the city of river and the appellant must receive site plan review approval prior to applying for building permit shall the zoning board of appeals Grant the relief requested subject to those conditions Mr lemina yes yes Mr Lopes yes Mr O'Brien yes yes Mr Pelton yes yes and chairman Tucker yes yes the variance has been granted thank you very much Mr chairman and the members next calendar item number please nice next application is a427 125 Squire Road real estate Holdings LLC juul s swamp Scot Mass requesting the following variances of the re revised ordinances to enable the appellant to construct an additional 56 hotel rooms to the rear of a hotel currently under construction at 125 Squire Road 172 4010 respect to rear yard setback respect to far and respect to minimum parking requirements lumac carcass seport Landing 152 Linway Lin Mass thank you members of the board thank you Mr chairman uh we want to thank you for sharing our vision and the important facts surrounding the new improved proposal to expand the hotel at 125 Square Road which we will need your help with as you may recall the site was previously the papagino site consisting of more than 1 acre 4,738 square ft and was previously permitted by right because of the it met or exceeded all the requirements regarding setbacks parking Etc to construct the hotel well now that and that was many moons ago and now that times have changed and we have found that the demand for hotel rooms especially in Rivier is through the roof after careful consideration deliberation many meetings with City officials and some of our Outreach efforts to the neighborhood we have before you our improved proposal um which includes 56 rooms it would be the same height 4 over one with 75 parking spots after we listen to concerns of elected officials site plan review members members of the administration and various stakeholders and butters uh and I just give you a quick example at site plan review the deputy fire chief was very concerned about the Ingress and egress of the fire trucks as they approached the building he wanted to make sure they could navigate the site just in case in case of a mergency they had to get their ladds up to the fourth floor and so forth so we listened to those concerns and we tweaked the original proposal to mitigate that impact and the site plan review members and particularly the deputy chief was satisfied uh next slide it's not okay not I the display andw try to give instruction not a big deal we can all right no problem and what we had was the original approval um the second plan so on the parking plan you'll see the original 100 rooms you'll see the addition of the L-shaped uh room count same height and you'll see the parking underneath so it's the four the one when we heard about the concerns about the on street parking which momba is that how you pronounce it um makoba thank you so what we did was there was General concern on that about tenants that live in those apartments that were worried about coming home and not having parking so what we committed to with respect to the hotel every every single member or guest that comes there'll be a sandwich board at the checkin counter they'll be handed a piece of paper that basically says any parking outside the hotel site that is offsite you'll be towed so there's no parking offsite we're going to make that very clear and we need to make that commitment to the abutters uh one of the requests from the the local counselors had to do with one or two spaces in case of emergency for some of his constituents so we agreed if necessary on an emergency basis to dedicate one to two spaces for the people on makoba or anybody in those surrounding Apartments when we heard about the concern about the shadow studies so our architect performed the shadow studies and as you will see in your file at any time there are no Shadows any time a year or any month there'll be no Shadows on the abing properties which was a concern in your packages we're we're happy to expand on the particulars we put a traffic study that shows that 39% of the public that goes to the Sheridan Four Points for example which is less than a quarter mile is really generated by airport traffic so 39% of those people actually drive the other 60 to 70% Uber Lyft and other sources to get to the hotel the other letter came from the on-site general manager when we wanted to substantiate the facts on the difference between the 100 rooms and 156 rooms with respect to revenue to the city so that hotel if if approved that excess room to6 would be somewhere between 250,000 on the low end and 500,000 on the high end give or take 330,000 is what the Sheridan Four Points I believe paid last year and that is on in the file that you have so we have the owner here we have the architect here and some of the supporters that have either worked for Jewel or are involved from a business standpoint on Squire Road we'd be happy to answer any and all questions and thank you for your time thank you okay I'm going to open it up to proponents if you have spoken in before and you're going to be saying the same thing about the hotel there's no reason for you to get up if it's something new that you want to add please I welcome you up to the microphone you'd have to state your name and address for the record any counselors wish to speak good evening counselor good evening Mr chairman Anthony zambuto 87 High Street Rivier I've been on the council I think 25 plus years I think I'm the biggest proponent for hotels of anybody I've been the cheerleader the only one that might have beat me was former counselor uh Powers who was a cheerleader for hotels and why hotels bring the biggest amount of Revenue to the city for the least amount of services you hotels don't require any Services we don't pick up their trash they keep their place clean that it it's it's like a gift to the city coffers uh that's why I always supported every hotel that ever came before us and helped them in any way I could to to to get it to be a done deal um that's my reason for being such a cheerleader but this particular project I looked at and and I did a you know uh an analysis of of the 56 extra rooms really requiring very little relief for a big game my back of the match book was more like 450,000 maybe I was being a little over optimistic maybe that's too many uh asking for too many uh rooms a year but the ballpark is definitely in the $400,000 range um and like I said the project really doesn't ask for a lot of relief um I don't want to get into all the we've forced the owner to uh have six shuttles and and all kinds of stuff like that so there there there'd never be a a a problem with the minor relief uh for the parking or for that matter any of the uh uh variances asked for here so I'm a big supporter for this and I would ask you to please support it thank you thank you any other counselors wish to speak councelor Angela Gino SAA I'd like to Echo what my fellow counselor um Zan buo said Mr marus was talking about the revenue of of what it would bring into the excise tax revenue that would come in to the city each year it's about $400,000 it's 65% times $350 a room per nighttimes 56 it equals out to a $400,000 in Revenue um this is the best kind of commercial business for the city every year there's little to no impact on city services such as the trash the fire the police and the schools that's number one the schools we can't take much more in the schools it's awesome for the economy and it also will employ a lot of people so I'm in favor of this thank you very much thank you are there any other proponents anyone in favor kindly step up to the microphone state your name and address for the record hi good evening everybody push the mic up there you go my name is Santos so I'm the general manager of Nick next to his neighbor so it good for the business for the Rev so we get more business if we get more rooms in rev the hotels and everything it's always busy place in the Square Road so we support with them so we always for the good business for them and for us so we support for that thank you thank you could I have your address please are there any other props anyone else wish to speak please step up to opponent proponent thank you much good evening name and address for the record please good evening my name is Elias fui I live in 44 Chamberlain Avenue uh I do know Mr Joel for long time he's in favor of employing more employees uh definitely will increase more traffic definitely will uh will help uh local residents and uh employing them uh Mr Joel is a is a good businessman he's for the community before he knows so I'm in favor thank you thank you any other proponent good evening everyone uh my name is U Andrew Mali uh from 180 Northfolk Avenue in swamp Scot Massachusetts I've been known U uh Mr s for about six years now as a neighbor and as a and as a businessman and all I can tell you tonight is in a request like this you got a way um like the benefits and the risk so um do we benefit from this request or there are actually more risk actually by by approving it and actually uh I believe that actually there are more benefits um as the previous actually speakers actually stated is that the majority of the customers they come from the airport the revenue for the city actually they stay locally in Rivier they don't actually go in other cities uh jobs um and from my acquain with him actually from all these years all I can tell you actually he has an imp recable record as a businessman as a family man he always does what he stands for um he has actually a great record as a businessman with the previous uh businesses that he actually he has locally um I can mention Sheron and laquint so even though that you might have those dots that I mean even with the minimal conditions actually uh he will do anything to actually set satisfi though so I'm actually all for it actually so I ask the board to approve uh his request thank you there any other proponents seeing and hearing and I'll close that side of the hearing any opponents anyone opposed kindly step up to the microphone state your name and address for the record please good evening chairman and members of the board my name is Christine Robertson I reside at 187 charger Street I stand before you as a resident of Rivia for well over 45 years I have seen the growth of Squire Road over the years and I as well as every every neighborhood along Squire Road has endured The increased traffic noise congestion trash and foot traffic through our neighborhoods the current construction proog project at 125 square road takes up just about the entire footprint of the property where is there room for an additional 56 rooms which will increase this tremendously and where are the patrons going to park which it has been answered my understanding is that this developer is the same develop that developer that will build a boutique hotel not 100 yards from this current project please correct me if I am misinformed when will they be before the board to appeal this increase in size also you must realize that Squire Road is not the place to continue to allow business and corporations to expand on what they have originally been granted it is so greedy of one to be granted a permit to build and then to appeal it to make it even larger than originally proposed why aren't they ever satisfied with what they have been given always having to push the envelope My Hope Is that you will start saying no to these requests and think about the detriment to the people who endure the aftermath of these projects every day Squire Road is not the Atlantic City Boardwalk when does this stop please realize that there will be five hotels within one mile between Squire Road and American Legion Highway this does not include the comfort in near Bell Circle that will only increase the traffic noise congestion traffic and foot traffic in the area how many of you live close or live in the area of Squire Road we endure this every day if you don't perhaps you should sit at brown circle or at the intersection of Squire Road in charger Street and watch the traffic listen to the noise watch the people throw their trash on our yards and other goings on daily the traffic from 1:30 p.m. until past 6:00 p.m. on American Legion Highway in Squire Road is gridlocked we don't need any more to address any more to add to the mess that we live with every day it seems that the developers that come into this community are hellbent on destroying the city Perhaps it is time for them to take their development into their own communities let's see how far that gets them as the saying go a beer does not defecate where it eats perhaps it's time for de developers to stop defecating all over R and eating their fil man somewhere else thank you for listening are there any other proponents oppon proponents opponents opponents opponents okay all right originally I welcomed the 100 unit um Hotel uh because it really improved a site that was an eyesore the papagino site was abandoned and and ugly and for a long time so the 100 unit Pro I I was satisfied with um I'm a bit confused and I like to try and get a few answers um and I think it would help clarify it for me and hopefully other people in the audience the structure of the building is already up the additional 56 rooms would that be an additional floor or an addition to the back or are they already included in the original in the existing structure so what does that the existing structure Does it include 100 rooms or 156 rooms could you answer that okay but you want to ask any other questions please do so now so they'll answer it all at the end all righty so that's question number one um I did a cursor review of the site plan and one of the areas for Relief they're looking for is to reduce the rear yard setback from 30 ft to 20 ft when I look at the site plan in the rear yard to accommodate the existing 75 spaces there's 45 ft between the back corner of the building and the back property line so I need so they're showing 45 ft and they're requesting a variance from 30 to 20 so I'm just trying to make one and one equal to and they probably have a good answer for it but if they could clarify that I'd appreciate it um thirdly as the largest of butter I've never been contacted by the owner or the Vel opers of the Builders of the project I have encountered some issues um when they were on the foundation stage we got a lot of rain and when they dewatered the site they flooded my parking lot and all of my catch basins they also flooded MOBA Street and the catch Bas at the corner of MOBA Street and Ward Street and the DPW had to come down the construction site I've been in the construction business my entire life I wouldn't call the most orderly site so I've never been contacted my initial interaction with a company has not been favorable um I believe the increase from 100 to 156 is too dramatic um in the packing variants you're basically ignoring all of the rules and regulations that were put in place to safeguard a development that will not cause issues so when it went through original site plan plane review in my estimation I've been through S plane review probably 20 or 30 times the entire site has the entire application with this addition would have to be reviewed there's an impact on water on SAR on parking on traffic um maybe they've already done that through site plan review I looked at the file and I did not see a site plan review approval letter the original one or a revised one so at this stage there are some questions and if it's possible if we can get those few basic questions answered I think it would help clarify it not only for me but for the board thank you are there any other opponents anyone else oppose seeing I'll close of the he does the applicant wish to explain get up and explain answer those questions before it gets taken to a vote yeah we checked uh lumac carcus 152 liway we checked on the abutters list and reached out um I apologize quite frankly uh not for coming to visit you myself um but those are uh questions that should be answered um I think there are reasons for each I don't know if we could blame that site for a flooding on mober on that but we can look into that that with respect to the certified site plan the original we're happy to provide that to him one little side note the Landscaping Company in the back is actually encroaching on our property 5T doesn't sound like a lot um but we made an attempt to maybe help relocate them it would be much better but there's a 5- foot encroachment in the rear um the gentleman had all legitimate concerns and I think that he needs to be about educated on what the reality of this is and hopefully we'll gain his support and I'd like to meet with him anytime I'd be happy to sit down and go over those questions so that it's clear to everyone what we're either approving or disapproving um and so I would respectfully request that this be postponed for a week or whatever your schedule allows I'm available anytime to to meet and try and get a better clarification of the project and then um report back so I'm not sure how You' like to handle that from this stage did you looked at these plans that they they presented tonight have you come up and taken a look at these plans at the city clerk's office yes I I looked at I have a copy of the file with me but but it wasn't it wasn't maybe not as a developer I'm surprised that you wouldn't know that the addition is an addition to the property so I'm confused on your comment what's confusing is that the entire super structure of the building has been built the entire concrete structure of the building is erected correct so and they have to erect the additional structure as it's on the plan I haven't seen that plan so I I I may maybe in the file that I got from the clerk's office it is it is I think it's very clear to us as as members and I believe most of the audience knows that that's an additional structure okay and is that where is that structure being built yes it's in the file that you obtained so that's that's my most confusing that well I don't think the file if the file is the same file that you pick I went [Music] all right you'd have to get back to the microphone with that addition in the back of the property the where were the originally in the site plan I'm looking at shows parking at the rear of the site so that's a raised structure with parking underneath it as depicted in the picture there okay well I don't have any you know I'm just looking at at at a at a site plan so I can't really discern that well they they had the pitches presented but it is depicted as with a race structure okay um it so to answer your question as far as parking the parking would be under the building it's it's a rais structure okay all righty um well I I guess in we put it back up on the screen but it is a rais structure all right I I you know unfortunately the file that I had did not include that so I apologize for that um the well in conclusion I think the increases are too intense for that site and that's my my opinion and and uh I hope you take it under consideration thank you okay thank you are there any other questions that need to be answered or are we all set with that any members wish to speak yeah I'd like to um say that I agree with council's Gino and zambuto and I'd like to make a motion to approve there's a motion on the floor to approve uh we did have conditions on the last one and they would continue on with this one as far as um there was one concern that was Employee pocket and I believe that that was addressed at with the shuttles that if there was a need to um transport employees to another um parking lot that that would Acom be accommodated am I correct I see the Nar of the head so that that any other concerns I believe the shuttles were all listed to by the councilors that that's those concerns were raised and I think they went up to six shuttles now which I thought was crazy but they are is there any other questions so the roll Call's on it ask for a roll call please subject to the conditions chairman yes the conditions the standard zba conditions are as follows if the rights authorized by this variance are not exercised within one year of the date of the grant of this variance the rights shall lapse this variance shall not be valid until the appellant has recorded this variance in plan in the sea County registry of deeds and submits document recording numbers and dates to the city clerk and building inspector of the city of Riv and the appellant must receive site plan review approval prior to applying for a building permit shall the zoning board of appeals Grant the relief requested subject to those conditions Mr lemina yes yes Mr Lopes yes Mr O'Brien yes Mr Pelton yes and chairman Tucker yes yes the variance has been granted there's no further business having no further business our next meeting will be call at the chair and I believe it's December 18th good evening