##VIDEO ID:hnEvuTG2pYs## test one test 1212 good even the meeting of the rever zoning board of appeals will now come to order I ask that you rise and salute the flag pledge Al to the FL of the United States of America and to the Republic for it stands one nation individ and Justice roll call of the members councelor I mean sorry Mr Lema yes Mr Lopes here Mr O'Brien here Mr Pelton here and chairman Tucker here here corm is present first item on tonight's agenda is application A2 2428 Elion Samoa 7 view Street requesting a variance of section 172 4070a no parking in the front yard and section 17247 A4 40% of the front yard must be landscaped to enable the appellant to provide for two parking spaces in the front yard of 7 view street is anyone here to represent the applicant okay kindly step up to the microphone press press the button and state your name and address for the record please 7 view Street R okay do you wish to add anything to this so the the applicants the application speaks for itself touch it once and then you don't have to touch it again okay thank you um I actually requested for three parking space on the uh plot plan that I sent um it showed three parking spaces in the front of the house oh it's for parking in the front yard that's why this one doesn't count here there's two in the front yard one for front yard parking yeah yes it's sort of like the side of the house yes okay do you have anything more to add or that's it well when when we purchased the house back in April of 2021 the house was like that um well the front of the house was already paved and unfortunately we did not do our part of as a buyer to check all the if that was legal or illegal and now that it is it how it is we would wish to keep it like that because uh there is not a lot of space parking space on our street either and our house is a two family house so we have people that actually also rent from us and um that's why we would like for you guys to give us permission to keep as it is so you're saying that that you did no paving at all you didn't repave that or anything the same as it has been yes and I actually my neighbor is here um he's next he owns a garage next to us and he been there longer than I than we were and it was like that before okay I don't see the abd's picture side to side um if you want and there's no sidewalks there right just okay it's a dead end Street okay it's seeing that it's a public hearing I do have to open it up are there any proponents anyone in favor if you're in favor please step up to the microphone and state your name and address for the record so if you don't mind stepping as side good evening everybody my name is Arthur Arenal I uh have the garage next door to them I've been here for probably 25 years uh they did they were actually the third owner of that house the previous owner before them is who put the hot top down um and then they they moved to Florida uh uh and that's been but there's no place to park on the street only at the end there's two places so you park at the end of the street and how how's it going to get plowed how's it going to be uh you know when they come along with the sweepers uh you know I have some pictures to show you uh exactly where they are and how it comes up to to my garage You Know It uh but I've been if You' like to present them to the clerk we can take a look at them and if you don't mind giving your address all right I I live in uh AUST there for many years so you own the property next door yes I own the property next door and the property addresses well I know what you call it zero or whatever you know but it's uh it to me you know I get the bill from the electric company is zero so but you have them listed as an a butter this and my property runs all the way down to back that's Mr Aral La Aral it's okay Street that's mral okay you know so now the problem you know there everybody's always parked there in that house uh and then the guy the gentleman that lives across the street is handicapped so he uh he's been parking out in the street CU he he does not have a driveway you know uh I normally I don't park anything in the driveway where I am either you know uh I just keep a lot of my stuff in there uh you know instead of throwing away a lot of stuff I keep it in there and if I want to you know do something there I I do it but I've been here for a long for a long time I just uh you know so but there there is no no way for anybody to park there so that's going to block the street off if if they can't park on that property you are in favor that's what we need to know and I got to go on with the I've been there for almost 25 years and my son was down on Walnut Street that adjoins the property down in the bottom you know and I've been there that that long and you know I see everything that's going on up there all right thank you very much uh I hope everybody agrees to uh leave it alone okay we still have a hearing to go on to so are there any other proponents all right thank you no one back did everybody say everybody's seen him yeah good all right thank there any other proponents hearing not I'll close that side of the hearing are there any opponents hearing not all closed that side of the hearing any members I got a question I drove down there today and I know there's a mix use of parkings some houses have parking in front of the house some are on the side of the house um a lot a lot of that area a lot of people use the the front of the yard as sparking as the street are very narrow right right my only concern would be um you have a stairway right out front there mhm so would they need to get uh the building department and the fire department involved to where you can put your parking Lanes cuz you can't park right in front of your entrance but my entrance that's a side entrance a second entrance the entrance is where we have how the um plot plan was built was designed there is no parking in front of the actual main entrance to the house par space space that's that entry way that's the entry way right okay yep now you got a two family right yes so how many CS total in that house three so my husband and mine and our Tenon so you wouldn't be able to fit three cars there yes so it's one on the side and two on the front yes open I see there's one on the side okay okay thank you thank you my my concern is you're asking for front yard parking but yet your parking spaces are not the legal size they should be 9 by8 and these are 8 1/2 by 17 8 1/2 by 17 and the one on the right is 8 and 1 half by 17 but I'm sure that could be a 9 by8 parking space so I would think that you're not just coming for front yard parking You' be coming for a reduced parking space as well am I correct asie I did not see that on Frank's letter however no I didn't see it um I don't know who drew up this plan for you um V Vineyard um I think they yeah Vineyard okay I forgot the name cuz I don't know why he put 8 and a half by 17 when you should have a 9 by8 space but it does it does have enough space for the 88 by8 maybe it was no it's 9 N it it does have enough space for it nine maybe he just made it wrong because I think it's 79 feet the front of the house yeah I I have a concern that the the plot plan does not depict the prop asiz spaces so I would make a motion to continue and and so we can get a a new plot plan um because I don't think we should be voting on this that Frank stringi didn't even bring it to our attention or site plan review I just shouldn't say Frank stringi um so I second that motion there's a motion on the floor to continue this so that the applicant can get us a new plot plan with the 9 by8 parking spaces and if not then they would come back to site plan review asking for that type of uh or they just come to us did they have to go to site plan review again so you'd have to go back to site plan review just to yep so there's a motion seconded I'd ask for a roll call please shall the zoning board of appeals continue this matter to the January meeting Mr lemina yes yes Mr Lopes yes Mr O'Brien yes yes Mr Pelton yes yes and chairman Tucker yes yes this m will be continued I have one question for you why did you decide to come up did you get cited by The Parking Department yes okay $300 every week okay for seven weeks excuse me I have one other question for you yes wasil family was it I believe it was uh since the beginning at two family house thank you sure okay so just for the for your edification you're going to have to speak to the gentleman who drew up these plans because the spaces should be 9 by 18 if that can't be done um on all you I think you can do it on two of them if you couldn't do it on the one to the left on the facing the house then he'd have to go back to site plan review so that they could then you'd be coming to us for not only front yard parking variants or side yard um but the space size okay okay M thank you very much that I don't know so you should go right to inspectional services and ask them that question um you can tell them that we uh have continued this for um for clarification of the proper parking space sizes okay thank you next application is a429 Kyle Russo and Dylan Russo 74 quinci AV win Mass requesting a variance of section 17470 with respect to the requirement that no non-conforming lot shall be further reduced in area and Frontage in order to file an anr plan for Lots 112 and part lot 113 at 26 taple AV and lot 111 at 30 taple AV to enable the appellant to construct a new single family dwelling on lot 111 at 30 taple AV good evening if you press the button then it will turn red and you can there you go good evening Mr chairman uh members of the zoning board of appeals my name is Edward valenzula I'm an attorney representing the applicant um one of my clients Kyle Russo was here with me to my right um so this started off when my clients tried to file anr plan um and Frank stringy uh explained that you have to have your parking off the street you have to have off street parking so we revised the plan and um Frank sent a letter and I've spoken with him a few times we had to move the property line in order to get the off street parking and as a result we created a couple of non-conformities and the letter was part of the package but I'd like to hand it out to you if it's easier to have it in front of you because he he outlines clearly the relief we're looking for and then I'll talk about the relief so if I may Mr chairman yes that's fine so there are there are two lots here if you're looking at the plan that we uh we filed uh number 26 and number 30 taple so if you're looking from the street 26 is on the left that's an existing home and if you're again from the street side number 30 is to the right and that's a vacant lot right now so you can see the two driveways and uh between the two properties what we had to do is nudge the property line at number 26 over just a bit um in order to get the two driveways and it's that bolded line between um the the two uh the two properties by doing that at number 30 Tapley the vacant lot what we've done is we've reduced the um Frontage from 41.5 Ft to 39.1 we need 40 so we're we're less than a foot um in compliance and so that's we need that relief what we also did was we reduced the lot size from 3621 Square ft down to 34.99 it still meets the minimum requirement of 3,000 square ft but in Frank's determination because we were taking a non-conforming lot these are the merged Lots under this the uh the new bylaw um where you uh they've been always shown as separate lots have been recorded as separate Lots at the registry of deeds with the tax assess um but because technically they're considered non-conforming Lots when we redu when we went from 36 21 squ ft down to 34.99 square ft we need relief from that but again we still meet the minimum 3,000 sqt requirement so that's 30 Tapley the vacant lot on the right if you look at 26 Tapley that's the house lot um and on that lot we're actually increasing the square footage from 2724 Square ft 20072 24 up to 2847 Square ft so we're just under the 3,000 that's required for that lot but we've increased we've taken a non-conformity of being only 2724 we've increased it a bit so we need relief of variance for that um on the plan they show on the left side of number 26 on the side of the house they show um 8.2 uh foot setback and 10t is required I don't believe and Frank hasn't indicated in his letter I think he's in agreement we don't need relief from that for that because we're not touching that property line the building is there it's pre-existing with an 8.2 foot setback um again this is all required as a result of the off street parking so there will be the vehicles won't be parked out on the street um these have always been shown as separate Lots I filed with the package the plans from the registry of deeds there was a assesses plan I filed and highlighted the Lots so they've always been designated as separate Lots but title merged because they they abutted um the uh lot sizes and the frontage uh if you look at other Lots in the area it's consistent with the other Lots in the area the frontage um and the lot layout I would contend that the hardship here is the shape of the Lots if you look at the property line it's a it's a angle um that sort that reduces the size of each lot um also financial hardship and um in all other respects other than the relief I just outlined in all other respects we comply these Lots comply with zoning and um this relief request that is consistent with the intent of the city council and its preamble to try to allow homes on these merges Lots um and I'm not sure how many of these have come before you but I understand the bylaw may have only been um enacted 2023 in the last couple years um and it's happening Statewide uh we're seeing there a lot of towns and and uh with State legislation to try to help people that have these merged lots that didn't know 30 40 50 years ago you should hold them in separate titles separate names so they own them and then they merge and the you've um and then they become non-compliant so this you know this lot that's number 30 that's vacant it's consistent it's actually bigger than number 26 and it's consistent with the other Lots in the area um so I did speak with um the uh Ward counselor Anthony K cogliandro I'm embarrassed I'm Italian and I'm not doing Justice to his name um earlier today he said he's heard from no one and uh you know he didn't see any issues if there were any he thought he thinks he would have heard from people uh my client took the plans and took some papers and he walked around to the ABS knocked in their doors he did speak to the gentleman across the street who said he supported it and I can represent that to you uh that he supports this relief the others uh basically um said they you know they had no failings one way or another um and so with that I will um answer any questions you might have for me or my Cent seeing that it's a public hearing we'll have to ask if there's any other proponents um is there anyone a proponent anyone in favor seeing in here not all close that side to hearing any opponents anyone opposed seeing and hearing on no close that side of the hearing I do have a question um looking at the the lodge plan here um the parking spaces on the left side of number 26 do not conform to our parking standards because it's 8 by two rather than nine um and you don't even depict the length of the parking space which well it does it says 18 so that's good um would that you need a parking yeah yeah CU it does doesn't show the parking dimensions on the number 30 there's no parking Dimensions listed um it shows 12 ft wide but it doesn't show the dimensions coming down which I would believe are pro it it's probably the 18 ft it's um they would have to depict on the plan here the line in the middle the do line it looks like it's showing 47 ft from the back of the parking spaces out to the front so that whole length is 47 and the the 30 it shows it's uh 12T wide atast right but 12T wide it doesn't depict the parking spaces being 9 ft wide um which it should it's supposed to depict it on the plan um yeah I made so um if I may just jump in here real quick so I brought this in front of site plan review um last year and um so the parking on the left okay I'm sorry if you state your name and address for the record I'd glad to you speak speak Kyle Russo uh 74 quiny have winr but also owner of 26 taple have um so we brought this in front of site plan review um and the left side parking spaces that you mentioned that are 8 by 18 um roughly so what the site plan review committee determined is that next to this paral on the left side there is a um a strip of land that's owned by the city of RW here I'm not sure what it's used for it's basically just a patch of grass and so they granted us um you know they basically said you can you can move forward with those eight you know 8ot parking spots um and then they asked us to put all the parking in the middle between the two properties and these are all uh 9 by8 um if it's if the length of it is not shown here I can certainly um I think that's just this line yeah right yeah so I I um I can certainly get you know uh an update from my engineer if if you need that to be shown as 18 but I can confirm that those are all 9 by8 um because that's the whole reason for uh for the variance is so that we can fit a 9ot wide parking spot on the right side of 26 taing okay that's why we nudged the property line over to get that in site plan review did not provide us any information um pertaining to the 8 by um 18 spaces um is there any other member wish to speak like I don't I'm not showing the park in here is it you can't you can't see it because it's such a lot a small thing that's why I P it up you look at the big plan here 8 by 18 8 by 18 T they're all T this here doesn't say 18 but I would think that it is just based on looking at the graph um qu this is exist 26 is the existing lot yes 26 is it has the house on it that's the existing house lot small yeah no I'd like to make a motion that this continue so that we could um ask site plan review for more a definitive information pertaining to number 26 on the left side if they're going to allow there's no easement shown for that lot for them to use anything on it um but perhaps the city city would allow it um so there's a motion on the floor to continue seconded seconded I'd ask for a roll call shall the zoning board of appeals continue this matter to the January meeting Mr lemina yes Mr Lopes yes Mr O'Brien yes Mr Pelton yes and chairman Tucker yes thank you Mr chair will be continued yeah so I have a plan now what I'm showing in the title and on the deed is that my client still owns that strip a land you referred to and if I can hand this plan to you but that's that's fine if he does it's a blessing Farm but we still have to they should be 9 by8 then so if you can do make 9 by8 that's even better the plan has to depict 9 by 18s or you'd have to ask for a variance for the size of two parking spaces okay when is the hearing in uh January do you know yet 22nd 22nd is January 22nd available for everybody that would if I may just check my calendar I sit on my local zoning board and for some reason that rings a bell the last standers is the third is the on the fourth Wednesday of the month so okay no that's that works for us that works for me good so our next meeting would be the 22nd of January all right thank you very much thank you for your time thank you next application is a 2430 River Mass owner LLC 602 West Office Center Drive Fort Washington PA requesting uh multiple variances of the revised ordinances of the city of Riviera to enable the appellant to consolidate numbers 96 100 140 187 and 186a Liber Bank Highway subdivide the subject land into two lots parcel one and parcel 2 and construct a technology enabled warehouse and office space on proposed lot one Lee Burbank Highway good evening council state your name and address for the record please uh good evening uh chairman and members of the board uh my name is Nancy O'Neal I am an attorney with d Ambrosio LLP located at 14 Proctor Avenue uh I am here tonight on behalf of the applicant R Mass owner LLC and I am joined tonight by Mr Chris roller who is part of the riv Mass owner LLC development team our project engineer Mr Dan catches of vhp engineering and also Attorney Jerry D Ambrosio of D Ambrosio LLP so Riv Mass owner LLC and its sister company route 1A owner LLC won a series of industrially industrially zoned Parcels along Lee Burbank Highway uh specifically 96 100 140 186 and 186 Lee Burbank Highway uh which I have an image of here so these Parcels are currently devoted to a series of disperate industrial uses and contain several dilapitated Warehouse uh and utility tank buildings which are over 50 years old uh so there are a number of buildings on these Parcels uh I also have an image of a different portion of the property so the reposal here tonight uh to consolidate uh the five Lots uh that I named into two lots demolish the outdated industrial buildings and construct a modern code compliant technology enabled Warehouse on the larger parcel a uh the smaller parcel B and this proposal would be preserved for a potential Maritime industrial use in future so the 96 to 186a Le bar Bank Highway property is burdened by a number of challenging conditions which render the property particularly well suited uh to variance relief and as is more fully set out in our support letter of December 9th uh 2024 which I hereby incorporate by reference into this presentation uh the property is burdened by a unique uh eight-sided shape uh and is a long narrow lot so this unique and irregular lot shape complicates both the division of land into dimensionally compliant and usable Lots uh in the placement of a functional industrial building and a pertinent parking and loading fa facilities so the plans before the zba have been carefully designed to represent the minimum amount of variance relief necessary in order to render the property suitable for development so due to the unique shape and constraints of the property division of the property into even dimensionally compliant Lots as difficult if not impossible un additionally The Irregular and narrow shape of the property requires that any building is placed towards the rear property line and any parking and loading areas are situated to the front and sides of the building adjacent uh to the right of way so importantly this conf configuration also increases safety by allowing uh for clear and easy access for fire and emergency vehicles off of Lee bar Bank Highway uh which I have an illustration up here and for these reason reasons uh the zba has ample grounds uh to Grant the requested variance relief so this proposed development has several benefits for the city of Riv uh firstly their proposal will consolidate a series of neglected industrial parcels and improve the face of liurban kway uh with a new state-of-the-art Warehouse building uh so this building will be a code compliant building uh built to 2024 standards for industrial buildings and be much safer and greener than the current industrial buildings on the property attractive screening will be installed along the frontage of the property including over a 100 new trees where no trees or Greenery currently exist on the the project will beautify a large stretch of Frontage at the Gateway of river and be a merit to the city uh as Lee BB Highway continues to evolve and improve Al secondly this proposal will also reduce traffic along Lee Burbank Highway uh is estimated by project Engineers VHB Inc in their traffic study dated November 5th 2024 and submitted to the zba uh as Exhibit C of the applicant support report letter of December 9th 2024 uh the proposed project will result in 335 fewer vehicle trips per day along Lee bar Bank Highway again we are estimating 335 fewer trips per day uh as compared to current conditions and this represents a huge reduction in traffic as part of this project and as part of this project curb Cuts onto Lee Burbank Highway will be Consolidated uh so we anticipate that six existing curb cut will be closed which will result in further traffic improvements and increased safety along this Corridor so in short this project is a great way to increase the economic base of the city without increasing congestion so this takes me to a third major benefit to the city of R uh which is increased tax revenue so by a conservative estimate the project will increase tax revenue from the property by around 60 to 70% to be over $400,000 per year so this project would provide an economic benefit to the city for many years into the future so overall this project will transform a neglected industrial property containing several dilapitated industrial buildings into a state-of-the-art technology enabled Warehouse built a 2024 code and safety standards with attractive screening and over 100 new trees the proposed lot reconsolidation and Warehouse plans represent the minimum amount of zoning relief necessary to develop the property and put the property to its highest and best use as a modern warehouse and we expect uh and this is conservatively speaking a 60 to 70% uh spike in Municipal tax revenue as part of this project uh to increase tax revenue to over $400,000 per year uh so again this project is a great way to grow the economic base of the city uh this project also enjoys the support of Ward one counselor Joan McKenna as well as the Rivera chief of planning and Community Development who has submitted a letter of support to the zba uh earlier today uh so in summary this is a minimally impactful project that will benefit the city of river for many years to come and we respectfully request that the zba uh Grant the requested relief and as always we are happy to answer any questions thank you thank you seeing that it's a public hearing we'll ask if there are any proponents anyone in favor Attorney Jerry de Bru I just wanted to make it quick this is one of those unicorn projects that you see Pop Up where communities really um uh love them in many ways you you have a situation where you're going to have environmental cleanup of a contaminated area similar to what's being done on the other side number two you're going to actually have less traffic coming out of this new project than what's currently there and not just a minimal amount over over 300 car trips a day so we have an environmental cleanup less congestion and then on top of it the tax base is going to grow um the tax revenue is expected well north of $400,000 a year to help offset the cost for the new high school you know I call it a unicorn project because I wish they were all like this I really do but they're not so this and that and that's why it has the support of the mayor the mayor's office the ward counselor uh and and really should have the support of everyone uh and it's wonderful that the city is uh finally attracting this kind of deep pocketed uh invest there to do these kind of projects um because again they are unicorn type uh events thank you thank you for taking such a short time I appreciate that any other proponents seeing and here and I all close that side of the hearing any opponents seeing and here and I close that side of the hearing members yeah I think it's a great project and I'd like to make a motion to approve okay I just have one question um it where the billboard is and where the Herz is is that Conner now part of this pel uh if you're looking down and then there's a roadway that goes down back where they used to have to the ships would come in and they'd be traveling down is that part of this parle so the the herdz parcel uh is not a part of uh this development not the big herdz parcel but where they sign and then it goes down to where the billboard is I believe that is part of this I just wanted to make it just check it out so if I can just point out so that roadway you're talking about relocating it to South so plan left here um so that roadway will be maintained against the property boundary with the Herz parcel so that parcel you're talking about now where excess tarmac equipment will be Consolidated into the development see but it is it's going to be part of the development that you're proposing exactly we're just taking that roadway shifting it down and the billboard would remain on the parel the billboard that's North up here no the one that's to the that's not ours yeah that's not okay so that's not on your APLE no the billboard is not the billboard is down here EXC you have one billboard to the north that's being removed okay thank you and are the ships still going to come in the back or yeah so that's why we've that's why the roadway is being aled so we we've tied out this call it 34 acre parcel here to tie with the doc so excellent thank you very much in in fact if I could elaborate on it that's why we're asking for the subdivision so that future development can also be accommodated on the piece that chairman Tucker so shely identifies so it allows for even more development of that dock area later great okay there's a motion on the floor to approve standard conditions the standard conditions are as follows pursuant to the permit extension act section 280 of chapter 238 of the acts of 2024 the rights if the rights authorized by this variance are not exercised within three years 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 subac 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 site plane review approval prior to applying for a building permit Mr lemina yes yes Mr Lopes yes yes Mr O'Brien yes yes Mr Pelton yes yes and chairman tuck Tucker yes yes the variance has been granted subject to those conditions the permit extension act provided for two additional years for permits issued in 23 and 24 okay thank you very well presented next application is a 2431 Jason Santos 16 Mountain a requesting a variance of section 17241 with respect to maximum number of Two and a Half stories within the RB District to enable the appellant to construct a third story to provide for increased living area for the owner's unit at 16 Mountain Avenue good evening good evening hello hello board hello members um my name is dwan Campos I'm uh the designer for this project and here's the owner Jason saso it's a family home it's actually okay just State your address please um at 20 Mountain Avenue thank you so actually I'd like to address that on everything say say 20 Mountain half but on the paperwork it says 16 so uh and on the maps it says 16 that's probably to tax purposes yeah okay uh also I'd like to add a couple uh letters on the record for in favor as well if that's okay all right uh so like stated on the application we would like to get a special permit for to do uh three stories instead of an allowed two and a half stories to increase the owner's unit upstairs it is a family home uh so family lives on the first floor and they live on the second floor of the property they would like to uh extend it for as their family keeps growing so everything would remain the same uh lot lot size it is an existing non-conforming lot uh where it no I'm sorry it is an existing conforming lot where minimum lot ER is required uh 8,000 and we have 8,800 we have uh ample parking space for the family units there so that's not going to that's not going to change uh setbacks will all remain the same and the only only uh difference is the proposed height where existing is 26 we will be going for higher to accommodate uh what we're what we're trying to do is we're going to create a men roof to create that additional living space and still maintain the character of the neighborhood okay thank you very much seeing that this is a public heing I'll ask if there's any proponents anyone in favor seeing in here not I'll close that side of the hearing is there any opposition anyone opposed seeing in here not over close that side of the hearing any members wish to speak just the extra space for the second floor yes it's a two family home it is a two family home it's going to be additional space for the second floor so that's kind of one of the hardships as well was it would be a financial hardship because that's like the where the they live so if to do an addition or anything like that that would be much more expensive and substantial to adding the living space upstairs okay so this is basically be for bedrooms yeah it would be an additional bedroom there and an extra living area is there a motion to approve with standard conditions seconded okay what that's for a roll call standard conditions are as follows pursuant to the permit extension act section 280 of chapter 238 of the acts of 24 if the rights authorized by this variance are not exercised within three years of the date of the grant of this variance the right shall lapse this variance shall not be recorded I mean shall not be valid until the appellant has recorded this variance 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 rever 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 yes Mr Pelton yes yes and chairman Tucker yes yes the variance has been granted subject to those conditions having no further business our next meeting will be January 22nd i' like to wish everyone a Merry Christmas happy holidays and happy Hanukkah thank you AG