2026-09-30 - Zoning Board of Appeals

00:15test. One, two, 31.

00:22>> Good evening. Welcome to the Rever

00:24Zoning Board of Appeals. Could we rise

00:26and salute the flag, please?

00:29I pledge allegiance to the flag of the

00:31United States of America and to the

00:33republic for which it stands. One nation

00:36under God, indivisible, with liberty and

00:38justice for all.

00:44>> Roll call club the members. Mr. Lemina

00:47>> here. Mr. Lopes

00:49>> here. Mr. O'Brien

00:51>> here. Mr. Pelton

00:53>> here. Miss Pratt

00:54>> is absent.

00:56And Chairman Tucker

00:58>> here. here. Corum is present.

01:01I just I'm just gonna

01:14First item on tonight's agenda is

01:16application A2624 Brandon Melendez, 262

01:20East Eagle Street, East Boston,

01:22requesting a variance of section

01:241716260F1

01:27with respect to no accessory structure

01:29can be located within the required

01:30sideyard and no more than 10% of the

01:32rear yard can be occupied by an

01:34accessory structure. Um requesting the

01:37ZBA to enable the appellant to raise the

01:39existing garage for the purpose of

01:41constructing a new 15.5T

01:44by 36.2 ft garage at 16 Rand Street.

01:51>> Is the applicant in the audience?

01:54>> Please step up to the microphone, press

01:55the button, state your name and address

01:57for the record, please. I bring the mus

02:06>> 16 right.

02:10>> Do you want to add anything to this? Uh

02:12you want to speak on it or no?

02:14>> It's it's straightforward. I mean there

02:16was one [laughter]

02:20>> seeing that this is a public hearing.

02:22I'll ask if there's any proponents.

02:23Anyone in favor? [clears throat]

02:26Seeing none, I'll close that side of the

02:28hearing. Any opponent? Anyone?

02:31>> We have one letter on file in

02:33opposition.

02:34>> It's Dorothy Mullo, 15 Howard Street.

02:38>> Um,

02:40are there any other

02:44members?

02:45>> Yes,

02:48I went by there that it's partially

02:50built, right? Three quarters.

02:52>> Yes, sir.

02:53>> The garage. So, what is it? You want to

02:55tear that down or it didn't go through

02:57an inspectional service?

02:59>> Negative. No, there there was uh one

03:01existing so we were just going to build

03:03around it.

03:04>> Build around it.

03:07>> I didn't see anything torn down over

03:08there. I just saw the new construction.

03:12>> Correct.

03:14>> But you pulled a permit,

03:16>> right,

03:16>> for the new structure. So I I'm not

03:19following what you want to do. You want

03:20to tear down. Is there one beside it?

03:23>> No, it's it's inside. So, the the the

03:26essentially we're proposing the that the

03:29garage

03:31uh be a little bigger than what it is

03:32now.

03:35>> So, the facade is built.

03:36>> So, you have a garage.

03:38>> Yeah.

03:38>> And you built one on the outside of it

03:41to tear down the old one inside.

03:44>> Correct.

03:45>> It is possly torn down already.

03:47>> The weather conditions, it's it's

03:48already the roof was already

03:50deteriorating.

03:52So my dad owns the one to the left. He

03:54owns the one to the right. I'm in the

03:56middle.

03:57And so I guess the the the abutter would

04:00be to the rear, which is on the Howard

04:04Street side.

04:06>> So if I'm facing the street because I

04:08went up and looked at this. Um

04:11>> there was a cease and desist put on

04:12this. Am I correct? From the building.

04:14So there wasn't a permit pulled for the

04:16original structure. Am I correct?

04:18>> That's correct.

04:18>> Okay. So this was being built without a

04:20permit. That's correct.

04:21>> Okay. I just wanted to make that clear

04:23because that's what I was told. Now, the

04:26if I look from the street in, you're

04:30saying the the property to the right.

04:33So, there's a driveway and then there's

04:35a home there. And you're pretty much

04:37you've taken right up to that almost

04:39property line with the new construction

04:41here. So, um that you own that

04:44>> that's correct.

04:45>> Property.

04:45>> We own the three properties.

04:46>> And then the one to the left you own

04:48also.

04:48>> Correct. So it's only the two ab well

04:51the almost two abutters in the rear that

04:54>> correct the one who I I didn't know

04:57there was the one on Howard Street but

04:58the one on Howard Street essentially

04:59would be uh we came 4 and 1/2 ft off of

05:02the property line and then Yeah. Yes, we

05:05Yeah, I did.

05:06>> It's 4 and 1/2 ft off that property

05:08line.

05:08>> Yes, sir. Positive.

05:10>> Okay. And then it's like a two level. So

05:13>> the parking garage itself will fit one

05:16vehicle in it and then this there's a

05:18second level that will be just for like

05:19a storage cuz it's raised. It looks like

05:22it's raised the way I'm looking at it.

05:23>> Just a good question. So it was raised

05:25because of the degrade, right? So

05:27>> So you're going to you're going to lower

05:28the grade inside and make it longer for

05:30two vehicles.

05:31>> Just make it leveled off. So, what we

05:33had to do is the the rear had to get

05:36raised because of the degrade already

05:38from the the rear of the property as

05:41it's coming in a slope. So, all I did

05:43was just come up a little higher and

05:45then that way we can put our pressure

05:46treated wood and go up, not have to dig

05:49down low because if you think about like

05:51weather condition,

05:51>> well, if you're going to keep it at one

05:53level, you're going to have to dig down

05:54low because the back has all dirt in it

05:56right now that you're going to have. So,

05:58you have the foundation lower than that

05:59dirt that's currently in there.

06:01>> Uh, yes. I mean essentially, yeah. So

06:03the foundation is it's still it creates

06:05the perimeter of course, but what I'm

06:08saying is to the rear um because of the

06:10way it is, it's probably around I want

06:12to say you know 10 feet I'm sorry 10

06:15inches from from the rear. It is a big

06:17slope. So

06:19>> and this will have a standard garage

06:20door on it. So a sixft garage door, not

06:23uh no more than 8t garage door. So no

06:26commercial vehicles will be housed in

06:28this.

06:28>> No commercial. No, just press regular

06:30>> nothing. No water saw, nothing in there.

06:33No. So, it

06:35>> pretty much will just be a break a box

06:37for lighting.

06:38>> That is correct. That's correct. Yeah.

06:39Just just two bikes. Uh my dad's bike,

06:41my bike, and uh my personal vehicle, my

06:43POV.

06:44>> Okay.

06:48>> What's the wish?

06:49>> Motion to approve.

06:50>> Motion to approve. Ask for a roll call

06:53>> conditions.

06:55>> Um our standard conditions. Um

06:59>> if these zoning board of appeals [music]

07:01approve the application, the following

07:03standard conditions apply. If the rights

07:05authorized by this variance are not

07:07exercised within two years after the

07:09variance was granted, which shall not

07:11include the time required to pursue

07:12other entitlements necessary to

07:14construct the project authorized by the

07:16variance or await the determination of

07:18an appeal referred to in section 17 of

07:20chapter 4A of the Mass General Laws.

07:22Such rights shall laughs. This variance

07:25will not be valid until the appellant

07:26has recorded this variance in plan in

07:27the Suffach County Registry of Deeds and

07:29submits document recording numbers and

07:31dates to the city clerk and building

07:32inspector of the city of River. And the

07:35appellant must receive site plan review

07:36approval prior to applying for a

07:38building permit.

07:42>> I'm sorry, what was the other condition,

07:43chairman?

07:43>> No plumbing

07:45for the wall. And additionally, the

07:48chairman has added a condition that

07:50there shall be no plumbing installed for

07:52the garage except for a water spigot.

07:56>> Shall the zoning board of appeals grant

07:58the relief requested subject to those

07:59conditions? Mr. Lemonina,

08:01>> yes.

08:02>> Yes. Mr. Lopes.

08:03>> Yes.

08:04>> Yes. Mr. O'Brien.

08:05>> Yes.

08:06>> Yes. Mr. Pelton.

08:07>> Yes.

08:07>> Yes. And Chairman Tucker.

08:09>> Yes. The variance has been granted

08:10subject to those conditions.

08:12>> Gentlemen, thank you.

08:15[clears throat] Next application is

08:16A2625 Washington Sherman LLC 9 South

08:20Street, Chestnut Hill, Mass. requesting

08:21a variance of section 172802D

08:25with respect to minimum parking

08:26requirements for apartment use to enable

08:29the appellant to remove the mechanical

08:30parking stacker devices and provide a

08:33total of 26 surface level parking spaces

08:36for the existing parking apartment

08:38building at 810 Washington A.

08:42>> Good evening. State your name and

08:43address for the record, please.

08:45>> Dan Civer, uh, 9 South Street, Brooklyn,

08:48Mass. Um, good to see you again.

08:51>> I think it speaks for itself. I've seen

08:53it as a public hearing. I'll ask if

08:55there's any proponents. Anyone in favor?

08:57>> Chair, there's two letters on file. One

08:59from Diana Pueta, 20 Sherman Street, and

09:02from the building commissioner, Lewis

09:03Cavinaro, in favor of the application.

09:05>> Thank you. Uh, there any other

09:08proponents? Seeing here, none, I'll

09:09close that side. Hearing any opponents?

09:12seeing it here. And then I'll close that

09:14side of the hearing. I wish you didn't

09:16have to do this in the first place. I

09:18understand you had to do it for a CO

09:20when right after that the council voted.

09:23So I apologize that you ever had to do

09:25that because the money is substantial

09:28and

09:28>> thank you.

09:29>> I would ask for a roll call for voting

09:31in favor for the removal

09:37>> to approve.

09:37>> Shall the uh to the standard conditions

09:40as well?

09:41>> Yeah.

09:41>> Okay. If the rights authorized by this

09:43variance are not exercised within two

09:44years after the variance was granted,

09:46which shall not include the time

09:47required to pursue other entitlements

09:49necessary to construct the project

09:51authorized by the variance or await the

09:53determination of an appeal referred to

09:55in section 17 of chapter 4 of the

09:58general laws, such rights shall lapse.

10:00These variance shall not be valid until

10:02the appellent has recorded this variance

10:03in plan in the Suffach County Registry

10:05of Deeds and submits document recording

10:07numbers and dates to the city clerk and

10:08building inspector of the city of River.

10:10and the appellent must receive site plan

10:12review approval prior to applying for a

10:14building permit. Shall the zoning board

10:16of appeals grant the relief requested

10:18subject to those conditions? Mr. Lemma?

10:20>> Yes.

10:21>> Yes. Mr. Lopes?

10:22>> Yes.

10:22>> Yes. Mr. O'Brien?

10:24>> Yes.

10:24>> Yes. Mr. Pelton?

10:25>> Yes.

10:26>> Yes. And Chairman Tucker?

10:27>> Yes.

10:27>> Yes. The variance has been granted

10:29subject to those conditions.

10:30>> Thank you very much. [clears throat]

10:32>> Thank you.

10:34Next application is A2626

10:37Orano Investment LLC 42 Geneseees

10:40Street, River, Mass. requesting a

10:42variance of the following ordinance to

10:43enable the appellant to construct a two

10:45family dwelling on the undeveloped lot

10:47adjacent to 42 Genese Street.

10:51The variance is for section 172430

10:54with respect to the requirement that a

10:56buildable lot within the LD zone must

10:58have an area of at least 4,000 square

11:00ft. Therefore, this is not a buildable

11:03lot for a single or two family dwelling

11:05and and a single family dwelling could

11:07only be built by a special permit of the

11:09ZBA if it meets the requirements of

11:11sections 172431

11:14and 032 regarding special permit

11:16conditions for undersized lots.

11:20>> Applicant, please state your name and

11:21address for the record.

11:22>> Good evening. My name is Gansy Panche

11:24100 Lancaster Avenue in Year. I'm

11:28representing my daughter, Nora Panche,

11:3042 Genesis Street

11:33and uh I'm very pleased to uh

11:35[clears throat] have them join this uh

11:38wonderful community.

11:40But however, Nora, she just got married

11:43and uh we haven't finalized everything

11:47based on planning and engineering. Also

11:52uh we plan to hold a meeting with the

11:55community and uh based on that

11:57respectfully I'm asking you to uh have a

12:00continuation

12:03until the next meeting which uh probably

12:06I I believe we're going to have

12:07everything ready.

12:09Thank you so much for your time and

12:11consideration.

12:23Okay, seeing that this is a public

12:24hearing, I would have to ask if there's

12:26any proponents. Anyone in favor?

12:32Seeing in here, I'll close that side of

12:34the hearing. There are several um

12:37opponent letters on file. Um

12:42I would just ask that they be read in

12:44the record by names. The names of the

12:46individuals that submitted uh written

12:48testimony. Min Koi

12:51Najun, Dennis Forion, John Ambrescino,

12:54Martin Elcantar, [music]

12:56Kevin Brown, Blanca Flores, Dana

12:59Alvarena, Nicholas Rystrom, and also a

13:02neighborhood petition.

13:05>> Thank you. Are there anyone in the

13:07audience that wishes to speak?

13:10Okay. I would ask that if you step aside

13:13that you can get up and name and address

13:15for the records, please.

13:16>> Nick Rystrom, 53 Genese Street. I'm here

13:18to speak in opposition. Um I did provide

13:21a letter on file as um this property um

13:27does not meet the qualifying

13:29um the qualifications for a undersized

13:32lot. Uh in addition, this uh property

13:35has been held uh in common ownership

13:38with the house next to it, which already

13:41is a two family um and um does not meet

13:46the requirements regarding parking. Um

13:48so, uh for those reasons, I don't think

13:51that um it's reasonable to allow a

13:54second family, a second two family on

13:57this undersized lot. Um and that u I'm

14:02uh here just to uh speak in opposition

14:04for it for that reason.

14:06>> Thank you.

14:06>> Thank you.

14:08>> There any other opponents?

14:14>> Name and address

14:14>> Edra Madrial 33 Genesis Street in River.

14:18Also agree with uh my neighbor. Same

14:21reason not agree with some having extra

14:26uh in the in the around us.

14:28And on behalf of my um family member

14:33whose neighbor is um on 50 Genese

14:36Street, they are affected by the

14:41building they try to build right next to

14:43her house.

14:45um from every perspective of her u view

14:48and the reason that she bought the house

14:51in that area recently about 3 months

14:54ago.

14:56>> So that's to the right going up that

14:59would be to the right of this

15:00>> correct.

15:02>> Thank you.

15:03>> Thank you.

15:03>> There any other

15:09>> Hi, my name is Jazelle Silva. I'm at 30

15:11Genese Street. I'm here before the board

15:13once again. Recently, I was here asking

15:17for a renovation of my home, converting

15:20my single family home to a two family

15:22home, which was granted. Thank you. And

15:25in fact, uh that addition was in uh

15:28in-law apartment. My parents live in the

15:30first floor. I'm against um this uh

15:33development for the same conditions that

15:36my neighbors have stated. We have

15:38limited parking to begin with. It's a

15:40one-way street with only one side

15:42parking allowed and aside there's

15:46already an existing two family build in

15:49the lot uh which is undersized for a new

15:53construction. Um at the beginning I

15:55believe it it was clearly purchased with

15:59the intention for a development

16:02uh which is I think not uh the case here

16:06and uh I really would like to ask your

16:08consideration for that. Thank you.

16:13>> Any other opponents? Any other

16:14opponents? Please step up to the

16:16microphone. State your name and address

16:17for the record.

16:18>> Hi Dennis Forjoni, 57 Genese Street. Um,

16:21I just have really a question for the

16:22board in in the sense that I understand

16:24that the petitioner has has asked for a

16:26continuence, but my my understanding uh

16:30of reading the zoning laws is there

16:32there is no mechanism in today in

16:35River's ordinances that allow for a two

16:37family under any circumstances on that

16:38lot. So, I may have that wrong. It's in

16:41my letter. All the details are in the

16:42letter that I was able to research, but

16:44I'm just wondering how we're even going

16:46to proceed with this given that there

16:48doesn't seem to be even a path under the

16:51current ordinances to allow for the

16:54application of a variance for a two

16:55family lot on that particular address.

16:59>> Okay, we can ask the clerk to explain

17:02that because there we can vote on it,

17:04but

17:04>> Okay. Yeah, I would love to hear more

17:06about that if it goes forward. Thank

17:08you. Could

17:11you

17:12>> I would check with the city solicitor.

17:14>> All right. Then it's going to go to our

17:16city solicitor

17:18um because there is question. So we'll

17:20ask that that um that to go to the city

17:23solicitor as well. There is a motion on

17:27to I'd like to have this continued

17:29because it never went in front of the um

17:32the ward counselor for one. So there's

17:34been no community-based meeting and

17:36that's what we ask. We always ask it to

17:38go in front of the wad counselor. I did

17:40speak to him. He's un totally

17:43understanding that there's a lot of

17:44opposition. Um but I said, "Was this

17:47presented to you and put in front of the

17:50community?" And he stated no. So, I

17:52would like to see it to go in front of a

17:54community meeting and in that meantime,

17:56we will then find out from the city

17:58solicitor if we have the right to vote

18:00on it

18:02because under the guidelines with our

18:04governor and the changes, it is believed

18:06that we can, but we'll find that out

18:07from our city solicitor.

18:10So, motion on the floor to continue. As

18:12for roll call, please.

18:14>> Shall the zoning board of appeals

18:15continue this matter to the uh next CBA

18:18meeting of October 28th? Mr. Lemma? Yes.

18:22>> Yes. Mr. Lopes.

18:23>> Yes.

18:23>> Yes. Mr. O'Brien.

18:24>> Yes.

18:25>> Yes. Mr. Pelton.

18:26>> Yes.

18:26>> Yes. And Chairman Tucker.

18:28>> Yes.

18:28>> Yes. This matter will be continued.

18:33Next application is A26271290

18:37Northshore Road

18:39365 Turn I'm sorry LLC 365 Turnpike

18:43Street Southeast in Mass for the purpose

18:45of repetitioning the ZBA to enable the

18:47appellant to construct a 16story

18:49development consisting of 334

18:51residential units at 1290 Northshore

18:54Road within the Wonderland Transit

18:56Overlay Development District.

19:09Good evening, chairman and members of

19:10the board. My name is Nancy O'Neal. I'm

19:12an attorney located at 14 Proctor

19:14Avenue. I represent the applicant in

19:17this matter, Wonderland Properties LLC.

19:19And I am joined here tonight uh by Mr.

19:21Zed and Mr. Zapage of Wonderland

19:23Properties LLC, our project architects

19:26uh and our project engineer. The

19:28proposal here tonight uh concerns the

19:301290 Northshore Road property which

19:33currently forms the Wonderland Ballroom

19:35uh function hall and event space uh

19:37which you can see here. Uh as this

19:41building is to be demolished as part of

19:42the proposal, the correct zoning relief

19:45for this project uh would be variances

19:47uh before this board. Uh specifically,

19:49our proposal here tonight is for transit

19:52oriented apartment use uh with an

19:55affordable housing component, a retained

19:58uh function hall uh in a small

20:00commercial space. Um and we have a a

20:02rendering of the proposed building uh

20:06for you here tonight.

20:08So this project has been uh designed to

20:10the requirements of the Wonderland uh

20:12transit oriented overlay. Um this

20:15proposal originally before came before

20:17this board in July. Um and since July uh

20:20this proposal has been uh refined um to

20:23meet the concerns of the board uh and to

20:26more closely align uh with the

20:28requirements and design uh of the

20:30overlay. So what is the Wonderland

20:32Overlay District? Uh the overlay

20:35district uh was created in 2010 in the

20:38area of Wonderland Station uh for the

20:40purposes of creating dense transit

20:42oriented housing and walkable commercial

20:44development such as restaurants and

20:46cafes. Uh the majority of this district

20:49is located to the east uh of the MBTA

20:52train track, so on the beach side. And

20:54many of the newer buildings um along

20:56Ocean Avenue uh were built pursuant uh

20:59to this district. and portions of this

21:01district are also located uh to the west

21:03of the train tracks. Um and this

21:06property is located on the westerly

21:08portion of the overlay district. So as

21:10mentioned previously uh this district

21:12builds on the underlying zoning which

21:15would be for the resident C2 district

21:17and it allows for greater height uh and

21:19density and with reduced parking uh in

21:22light of the district's proximity to

21:24public transportation. So specifically

21:26in the Wonderland overlay, um a project

21:29is allowed 16 stories and 160 feet of

21:32height. No setbacks are required.

21:35Parking is shared with available lots

21:37within 100 yards of the district

21:39boundaries and tandem parking uh may be

21:42utilized. So, this project before you

21:44tonight has been designed with the

21:45outline of the Wonderland overlay in

21:47mind while taking into consideration the

21:50unique qualities of the site uh and the

21:52public amenity in the ballroom that

21:54currently exists at the site. Uh so,

21:56this building is currently proposed to

21:5816 stories falling within the number of

22:00allowed stories of the overlay. And from

22:03our proposal of July, we have made

22:05specific and material changes in

22:07response to height and density concerns

22:09expressed at the meeting to remove a

22:11floor of residential units, which has

22:14brought down our proposed stories from

22:1517 to 16, our height from 182 feet to

22:19170 ft, and the number of units from 358

22:23uh to 334. And uh might I remind this

22:26board that the standard for specific and

22:28material changes is low. uh courts have

22:30found that specific and material changes

22:33include uh the addition of blackout

22:34drapes uh and landscaping. This comes

22:36from a case called Ranny uh versus Board

22:39of Appeals. And we are proposing massive

22:42structural changes here and a reduction

22:44of 24 units. Um so we would argue that

22:47the standard for specific and material

22:48changes which again can be as low as

22:50blackout drapes and landscaping uh is

22:53exceeded here. So what zoning relief is

22:56required for this refined proposal? A

22:58central aspect of this building is the

23:01function space. Uh the city of River

23:03does not have many venues of this

23:05nature. Uh it goes without saying that a

23:07function and event space is an important

23:09amenity for local residents and

23:11families. We understand that the

23:13community wishes to retain this amenity.

23:15Uh and we have agreed and the ballroom

23:17space uh is incorporated in these plans.

23:20So what does a function hall and event

23:22space need? A space like this needs

23:24ceiling height. Uh so the floor

23:26accommodating the ballroom is not a

23:27standard floor. It's a little taller

23:29than the other floors uh and adds height

23:32to this 16story building. Um so the

23:35added ballroom height coupled with the

23:37height of the garage push this building

23:38to 170 ft which is about 10 ft over the

23:42maximum allowed height of the 160 ft uh

23:45in the Wonderland overlay. Uh I

23:48understand that there were some

23:49questions in the previous meeting

23:51regarding the height of the building uh

23:52and airspace limits from Massport. I

23:56understand that the Massport uh limit is

23:58288 ft. Uh so we are well below uh that

24:01here. Again, this is a 16story uh

24:04wonderland overlay proposal that

24:06responds to the aims of the district as

24:09well as Massachusetts state housing

24:10goals. Uh so we are proposing transit

24:13oriented units here. These are not huge

24:15units. They are 400, 500, 600 foot units

24:19designed for residents who are commuting

24:20to work utilizing Wonderland Station and

24:23walking to nearby businesses for their

24:25day-to-day needs. Um, I often appear

24:28before this board and talk about walking

24:30distance to the train. Uh, this may be

24:32the shortest distance uh to public

24:33transportation uh that I have spoken

24:35about before you. Uh, this property

24:37literally borders Wonderland Station

24:39from door to door is about 150 ft or a

24:42one minute walk. And what does that mean

24:44in terms of parking and traffic? It

24:47means that residents and visitors will

24:48not be utilizing cars. They will be

24:51utilizing the blue line and local buses

24:53that depart uh from Wonderland Station.

24:56So we are proposing around 90 parking

24:58spaces here uh which is generous parking

25:00for the property um which is doortodoor

25:03150 ft away uh from the train. Again,

25:06the zoning for the overlay district

25:08calls for parking to be shared with

25:10available lots such as public lots and

25:12garages within a 100 yards of the

25:14district boundaries. This property um as

25:17you can see or as you saw is located uh

25:21directly adjacent to Wonderland garage

25:23on one side and the MBTA parking lot on

25:26the other side. So between this lot and

25:28the garage there are approximately 1,400

25:31shared parking spaces available to

25:33service this property. Uh I can say that

25:37this property has ample parking compared

25:39to others before the board uh with 91

25:41spaces on the site and by the terms of

25:43the overlay district 1,400 available

25:46adjacent spaces for visitors, venue,

25:48guests, uh what have you. Uh so let me

25:51be clear. Are we saying that 1400

25:52parking spaces are needed or will be

25:54utilized? No. Uh we are saying the

25:56opposite based on patterns in the

25:58neighborhood uh with transit oriented

26:00buildings. We do not believe that the 90

26:03spaces that we're providing are actually

26:04going to be used. Um you do not seek out

26:07a building like this to live in that's

26:09adjacent to the train. Um if you are a

26:11resident uh who has a car uh and we have

26:14heard concerns that people in fact wish

26:16to utilize cars. We respectfully

26:18disagree. Uh and this board has approved

26:20projects uh that are further from the

26:23station in this project with zero

26:24spaces. Uh so there will be ample

26:27parking uh for the ballroom and its

26:29events. Um, this is the way it operates

26:31currently. Visitors utilize uh the

26:33garage. Um, additionally, residents of

26:35the building would not qualify for

26:37resident parking stickers. So, if you

26:39live in this building and you're

26:40attempting to park on the street, you

26:41will be towed. Uh, so we expect car

26:44usage, parking impacts, and traffic uh

26:46to be minimal. This is the perfect site

26:49um for transit oriented apartments and

26:52fulfills the aims of the overlay

26:53district uh and the state for housing.

26:56So importantly, we are proposing an

26:58affordable housing component here. 7% of

27:00the project or around 23 units uh will

27:03be offered as affordable housing. So

27:05under um the amended 4A which calls for

27:08the public interest um and housing

27:10creation to be considered uh by a board

27:12when considering variances, uh we would

27:15argue that this project um is the

27:17perfect project uh under state goals.

27:20It's close to the train. It has reduced

27:22parking utilization and it includes

27:24affordable housing. So for these

27:26reasons, we would respectfully request

27:28uh that the board grant the variances.

27:30Um and we're happy to answer any

27:32questions that you may have. Thank you.

27:33>> Thank you.

27:36Seeing that this is a public hearing, I

27:37will ask if there's any proponents. Um

27:41I would think at this time the ward

27:43counselor would be approaching the

27:45podium.

27:49>> You are you are correct, Mr. Chairman.

27:50Thank you. Iron Overelski 53 dehone

27:53sheet w 2 counselor. Uh I've been

27:56watching this for a long time and uh I I

28:01was for the original proposal uh but it

28:05was shot down and uh he reduced one

28:07floor and uh we had we had asked him to

28:10put in this function hall and it is

28:14about 9 ft higher on a floor for the

28:17function hall itself which raises the

28:19building and removing the top one

28:21reduces it by about 12 feet. I think

28:23before it was 22 feet, now it's 12 feet.

28:26Um, and also it's in a flood zone, so

28:30it's going to have to be raised up off

28:32the ground some. So, uh,

28:36it's different and, uh, the way things

28:40are going in development, you know, I'm

28:42I'm prodevelopment and, uh, this is kind

28:46of out of the way from a normal

28:48neighborhood

28:50as far as local, you know, six,

28:53fourstory or twotory buildings. And, uh,

28:58it's right near already an existing

29:0116story building on Ocean Avenue. in the

29:04the condos at the uh Caribeta

29:06properties. So, it's not out of whack

29:09for that neighborhood and uh I'm in

29:11favor of seeing this happen. So, thank

29:13you.

29:15>> Thank you. Are there any other

29:17proponents? Please step up to the

29:18microphone, state your name and address

29:20for the record. Good evening.

29:21>> Good evening, Council Garino SA. Um 15

29:24Baitman.

29:26Um I'm also I'd like to echo what

29:29Councelor Novasolski said. Um

29:33when he spoke to the counselors about

29:35having the ballroom, we wanted the

29:40ballroom. We all want to have a function

29:43area. I mean, they are taking away our

29:45the one that we have now of the

29:46Kazaluchia. So, it's really important

29:48that we keep a function facility in the

29:51city of Rivier and that's why it went up

29:52to the 17 stories. Um this body has

29:56asked for it to be taken down a story

30:01which was fine but now unfortunately we

30:04have to lose

30:063% of of the housing because otherwise

30:09it's just um it it's no instead we're

30:14going to get the 7% instead of the 10.

30:16But this developer works quickly. He

30:18gets the job done right. And um as far

30:22as I've heard concerns from residents um

30:27I was reading, you know, stuff on on the

30:29internet and they were talking about,

30:31oh, there's going to be more cars parked

30:33in the middle of the street. They have

30:34to have one to one. No, they don't.

30:37People that build apartment buildings,

30:39they do not issue permits. And I just

30:41want to make that very, very clear.

30:42There is no cars that will come with

30:45those apartments unless it's on their

30:48lease. Um, so I just wanted to make that

30:51perfectly clear and um I'm in favor of

30:54this project. It's going to be a

30:56beautiful project. It's it's out of the

30:58out of um the the area where it's a

31:02thickly sit district and also um the

31:06fact that we do already have a 16story

31:09apartment building directly behind it.

31:11So thank you.

31:13>> Are there any other proponents?

31:16Please step up to the microphone. State

31:17your name and address for the record.

31:21>> Hello, my name is Travis Alpert, 19

31:23Coolage Street. I uh I'm in favor. Um I

31:26was here at the July meeting um with you

31:29guys and you guys probably know I'm a

31:31major proponent of affordable housing in

31:33River and how much we need it. Um

31:37unfortunately with the height going

31:38down, we lost um some of the affordable.

31:42Uh but one of the things I I wanted to

31:43talk about is um it heard a lot of

31:46people with concerns about you know

31:47traffic and when the high school's built

31:50up there's going to be a pedestrian

31:51walkway right going from Wonderland over

31:55uh to the other side and that's in the

31:57plans as far as I've seen. So um I just

32:00want to say that you know with people

32:02that have brought up those concerns I

32:04really think that one there's not going

32:06to be any drivers that are living there

32:08who are parking their cars there. So,

32:10how would it add to traffic? But also,

32:12uh with that pedestrian walkway uh in

32:14the future, um you know, that shouldn't

32:16be of concern. But uh thank you for

32:18hearing me. Um and I appreciate you

32:20guys. I'm in favor of this.

32:22>> Thank you. Are there any other

32:23proponents?

32:30>> Hi. Um I am Cook Yam. Uh oh, sorry.

32:36>> Go ahead.

32:37>> Yeah. Um I live at 243 Park Avenue. So

32:40uh this is my first time speaking. So

32:42I'm apologize anything foul wanting and

32:46thank you for your time. So um I speak

32:48in favor of this project as um I am an

32:52engineer in training and my company used

32:54to do a lot of um project with the

32:57government building and similar large

32:59building like this. So um but and I had

33:02personally to different uh apartment

33:04building. So from what I learned about

33:06this project from the presentation and

33:09learned project on the agenda I feel

33:11that this project is a very modern very

33:15competently designed and I have

33:17confident that this will be a success

33:20for the people of uh Revier and the city

33:24of Ravier as well and it will contribute

33:26greatly to our city.

33:29So um thank thank you thank you for your

33:33time.

33:33>> Thank you. Are there any other

33:35proponents?

33:36Seeing here and not none, I'll close

33:37that side of the hearing. Any opponents?

33:41Seeing here not, I'll close that side of

33:42the hearing.

33:44Any members wish to speak?

33:48>> Like to make a motion to uh vote on the

33:51changes.

33:52>> Okay. I,

33:54as the chair, respectfully asked for a

33:58continuence because items were presented

34:00to us and it was not within our 7-day

34:03time frame. Um, but if there's

34:06a wish to vote on this this evening, I

34:10would then ask for the roll call without

34:13what stipulations would you have?

34:15There'd be no uh standard stipulations

34:17and no parking permits. vote on first.

34:21>> We still have to ask if there was we

34:24have to take our first vote is to ask

34:28for

34:29>> the substantial change

34:30>> the substantial changes. So

34:32>> can we ask for the roll call from the to

34:35make sure there was substantial changes

34:37to the plan.

34:38>> Does the ZBA find that specific and

34:40material changes have been made in the

34:42conditions upon which the prior denial

34:44was based? Mr. Lemonina.

34:45>> Yes.

34:46>> Yes. Mr. Lopes.

34:47>> Yes.

34:47>> Yes. Mr. O'Brien.

34:49>> Yes.

34:49>> Yes. Yes, Mr. Pelton.

34:50>> Yes.

34:51>> Yes. And Chairman Tucker.

34:52>> Yes.

34:53>> Yes. The ZBA does find that specific and

34:55material changes have been made.

35:01>> My comments I think Nancy would want to

35:04speak on is as the chair here, we ask

35:08for seven days in advance for any um

35:12information that comes to us so that we

35:14could have the time to digest that.

35:18If I could uh just speak for context, I

35:21believe the uh only materials that were

35:23added uh as new uh there was a a

35:27I believe a shadow study um and a sheet

35:32showing uh elevations for Massport um

35:35but the plans uh themselves are

35:37unchanged from the original um September

35:40submitt.

35:43I am grateful that they did put the

35:45number of parking spaces, the

35:47dimensions, and as far as the proposed

35:51and required parking, they did specify

35:55that

35:57140 spaces for a club, but the proposed

35:59is zero, but there's no parking needed

36:02in the Wonderland Overlay District. um

36:05for edification for myself this as far

36:09as the Wonderland Overlay district this

36:12would be the largest property now with

36:16saying that Caribeta's buildings I never

36:19knew that they were that high so I

36:21apologize it still dumbfounds me to see

36:24but that's such a large parcel and so

36:26wide my comment was that this would be

36:29the largest property in rever and it's

36:31not so I do stand corrected

36:34I would ask for a motion to continue.

36:39Does that have to be a roll call? If

36:40someone else says that

36:43>> it's

36:49present that vote see

37:03on there's a motion to approve. We would

37:06ask for our standard

37:10a parking.

37:12>> If the zoning board of appeals grants

37:14the variances requested, the standard

37:16conditions will apply. One, if the

37:18rights authorized by this variance are

37:19not exercised within two years after the

37:21variance was granted, which shall not

37:23include the time required to pursue

37:25other entitlements necessary to

37:26construct the project authorized by the

37:28variance, or await the determination of

37:30an appeal referred to in section 17 of

37:33chapter 48 of the general laws, such

37:35rights shall lapse. This variance shall

37:37not be valid until the appellant has

37:39recorded this variance in plan in the

37:40Suffach County Registry of Deeds and

37:42submits document recording numbers and

37:44dates to the city clerk and building

37:45inspector of the city of Reier. The

37:47property shall not be eligible for

37:49participation in the city of Rivier's

37:51residential and visitor on street permit

37:53parking program and the appellant must

37:55receive site plan review approval prior

37:57to applying for a building permit. Shall

37:59the zoning board of appeals grant the

38:01relief requested subject to those

38:02conditions? Mr. Lemma,

38:04>> yes.

38:04>> Yes. Mr. Lopes.

38:05>> Yes. Yes, Mr. O'Brien.

38:07>> Yes.

38:08>> Yes, Mr. Pelton.

38:09>> Yes.

38:10>> Yes. And Chairman Tucker.

38:11>> No.

38:12>> No. The variance has been granted

38:14subject to those conditions.

38:22>> Next application is A26287

38:25Cheryl Realy Trust. Rasheed Shake,

38:28trustee of 24 Cheryl Drive, Shrewsbury,

38:30Mass. requesting the following variance

38:32to enable the appellant to request a

38:34special permit for a townhouse use

38:36within the RB district for the purpose

38:38of constructing a 4unit townhouse

38:40structure at port at two Porter Avenue

38:43section 17160A

38:46with respect to the requirement that the

38:48minimum lot size shall be 10,000 square

38:50ft with a minimum of 3,000 square feet

38:52of lot area required for each unit.

38:58>> Good evening. Could you state your name

39:00and address for the record, please?

39:02>> Good evening, Mr. Chair. My name is

39:04Rasheed Shik, 7 Shadow Realy Trust,

39:08Shbury, Massachusetts.

39:10I'm representing here for two

39:12photograph. And with your permission, I

39:14may uh explain where we stand.

39:19>> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So two

39:23quarter a in 1920 subdivision plan were

39:28three lots lot number 9 10 and 11 and

39:32subsequently

39:35can can the board members see these lots

39:40>> 9 10 11

39:43>> is that on a plan that you submitted to

39:44us

39:45>> yes sir everything

39:46>> so we already have that in

39:47>> this this is nothing new this is what's

39:50exactly what's submitted

39:51>> this was I'm giving history, Mr. Chair.

39:54>> Okay. But that was what submitted to us.

39:55So we have

39:56>> this was part of it. Yes, sir.

39:57>> Okay. Thank you.

39:58>> So in 1920, this was the plan. But now

40:00I'm giving you the current condition. We

40:03conducted the survey. The current

40:05condition is these have been converted

40:09into two lots. These the two lots

40:14combined is where the house is right

40:16now. And then the third lot is still

40:19intact without any construction. So

40:23right now in the current plan there are

40:25actually two legal lots. Lot 910 has

40:28been combined to build the house and

40:31whenever it was built and then there's

40:34another lot here which is lot 11. So the

40:381920 lots three lots converted into two

40:41lots and that's the current condition

40:42right now. This is really the corner of

40:45Iliot Road and Portraf and as you can uh

40:50as you know that this is really in a

40:52100year flood zone and there's also

40:54pretty close to uh train station and and

40:57railroad crossing and so we basically

41:01you know felt there were different

41:03routes that one route could be that we

41:05could go out and ask for two single

41:08family homes. Of course, we would have

41:10to talk about some other variances in

41:12that regards because right now we have

41:14105 feed frontage total. If I have to

41:18build, you know, uh each there are

41:21different uh you know sizes of lots and

41:26frontage and setbacks in you know all

41:28these streets. However, there is a

41:31precedence that people have built single

41:33family home in smaller lots. So we had a

41:37choice that we request two single family

41:40homes or two duplexes. But instead we

41:43thought that it would be more

41:47appropriate for the city as well as less

41:51disturbance if we ask for a one rowhouse

41:54of four units. And that way we would not

41:57be asking

42:01we would not be asking really any u

42:04variance for the setbacks. Currently the

42:07house is situated where it's only 5 ft

42:10away from the Iliot road and we will be

42:13changing that and we'll bring it to the

42:15setback and move it to 20 ft. So

42:18basically it will be more conforming to

42:21the to the current zoning setback. So it

42:24will be 20 ft from Elliot Road, 20 ft

42:27from So we'll combine these two lots and

42:30we'll build one four unit rowhouse and

42:34in RB district you need special permit

42:37to to build that. So we will be seeking

42:40special permit but before we have

42:42another hurdle and the hurdle is that

42:44you need I think 80 feet frontage but we

42:47have 105 feet frontage. So we're good.

42:49We need 20 feet set back. We have 20

42:51feet set back. The hurdle really is the

42:5410,000 versus 90 280 ft². We have about

42:589280 ft² and we need to be 10,000 square

43:02ft to build a a row house in that

43:05district. Whereas I have gone and I've

43:08looked at the other houses in the area.

43:12Apologize

43:17by the way before I show you that I made

43:20some that this is will it will look

43:23like.

43:25Can I see?

43:26>> Yes ma'am.

43:27>> This is what it look like. And basically

43:30where did we come up with this idea? I

43:32did talk to the city council and some

43:34other folks and they advised me that it

43:36would be best that you build something

43:38which fit which will fit the

43:40neighborhood. And if you look at 21

43:42through 27 Porter AB and then the other

43:45street, I'm going to show you some

43:47pictures. This is what they have done.

43:49So since since this is in the 100redyear

43:52flood plane, most of these old houses

43:56are built in the flood plane. They're

43:58not built about. What we will do is we

44:00will will raise it up and we'll bring it

44:03to conformance. And that's what actually

44:05across the street people have done. And

44:08they actually I think they may have

44:09gotten variance on the setback as well.

44:11They may not have 20 ft set back but we

44:14will be we are actually instead of

44:16asking for five row houses there have

44:18been five row houses built some six row

44:20houses built but we are asking only four

44:23because in this way we don't have to ask

44:25you for any setback variance. We're only

44:28talking about overall lot. Okay. Yes. I

44:31can move fast if you like. Okay. And

44:34this is really the neighborhood look

44:36like. As you can see, this is our house.

44:39And this and this over here is across

44:41the street what's built.

44:51>> Okay.

44:52>> If we're going to we you have to address

44:54everything to us. If she has any

44:55questions, she can come up to the

44:56microphone after. That's just our

44:58protocol. I apologize.

44:59>> Sorry, Mr. Chair.

45:00>> We normally allow five minutes for the

45:02presentation. So if you can just speed

45:04it up,

45:06>> Mr. Chair,

45:07>> thank you.

45:07>> I would just only conclude that all

45:09we're looking for is really two

45:12variants. Number one, 10,000 square ft

45:14to 9280. It's already written. And

45:17secondly, par unit required 2500 ft² and

45:20we have 2,300 something.

45:22>> Thank you. Great presentation.

45:24>> Um, seeing that this is a public

45:25hearing, I would ask if there's any

45:27proponents.

45:29Seeing that the water counselor is in

45:30the audience. Um

45:33I would ask if he is going to speak.

45:36Council, are you going to speak on

45:39behalf of this

45:42since this is your ward?

45:44>> Actually, it is not my ward.

45:45>> It's not.

45:46>> It is not. It's part of W one

45:49>> and the redistricting. Under the

45:50redistricting that is not my district.

45:53>> Not anymore.

45:54>> I I lose I lose down from uh Garfield A.

45:59Okay, I stand correct. Thank you for

46:01telling me that.

46:02>> Appreciate me.

46:05>> The I have n received no opposition on

46:09this at all. I've I've tore that

46:10property very well. Um there was only

46:14one concern by an a butter and that's

46:16the tree on the corner to the So if

46:18you're facing the property, there's a

46:20tree on the very corner. Are you taking

46:23that down,

46:26>> Mr. Sh? If it is outside of the setback,

46:30we of course we'll leave it. [laughter]

46:33We like green.

46:34>> The only question I had by

46:35>> and I think it is outside.

46:37>> Yes. All right. So,

46:38>> I got a question for you. Um, will your

46:40construction help?

46:41>> Well, we still we still have um

46:43proponents.

46:44>> Still proponents out there.

46:46>> Hearing none, I have to close that. Are

46:48there any opponents?

46:50>> Anybody opposed?

46:51>> Hearing none, I'll close that. No, I'm

46:53sorry. Go Will your construction help

46:54with the flooding at all in that area?

46:58>> Yes, sir. It should because it's in the

47:00flood plane right now,

47:01>> Mr. Sh. May I? Sorry.

47:03>> Okay. Uh, yes, sir. It should because

47:07basically right now it's built in the

47:08flood plane.

47:09>> So, we will be not building the

47:12basement. There won't be any basement.

47:15>> So, it would just be a crawl space or

47:17maybe not even crawl space. will do slab

47:19on grade and uh we will not we will be

47:23above the flat plane that's the reason

47:24it's a raised structure

47:33>> it will be a raised structure as you can

47:35see

47:36>> right my question is you're going to be

47:39taking that whole block

47:42is the flood water going to run off that

47:45property into a new sewer line Or

47:49>> no sir in the flood plane it's a

47:51100redyear flood plane it's not like

47:53it's going to be happening every day

47:54>> right

47:55>> so when the 100year flood plane happen

47:57if you have the house as current

47:59situation it will obstruct that water to

48:02flow from one side to another side but

48:05when these ra structures are built there

48:07are lures right so then the the water

48:11can flow under the house without a

48:14problem

48:15>> but you have to go you still have to go

48:16in front of I have to go in front of the

48:19inspector department for these

48:20discussions.

48:21>> The conservation commission they would

48:23have to go in front of it.

48:24>> I I'm sorry. It it will the answer would

48:27go to the building commissioner and the

48:29building commissioner look at these

48:30things

48:31>> but you'd still where it's a flood

48:32plane. You'd still be going in front of

48:34the conservation.

48:35>> I'm not sure if the re city of Rier

48:38require the conservation but

48:41>> if it does we will have to.

48:43>> Yeah. So residents would

48:45you know

48:47you would

48:48>> Yeah.

48:50>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh for

48:53latitude, just so you know, behind this

48:57building along the railroad tracks is a

49:00city uh drainage ditch. So the wall of

49:03water would drain back that way.

49:05>> Okay? you know, even from what he had in

49:07the building, he can pump it would be

49:09pumped out into the uh uh MBTA property

49:15uh where there's a a county ditch which

49:19actually flows from Shirley A down to

49:22the bridge on Re Beach Parkway and then

49:25bends down along into the Standish Road

49:28and goes out out into the Bell Ale.

49:31>> You know, that's where most of the water

49:32would drain. Would there be any upgrades

49:34that they would need to do?

49:38>> So, um, but I I know, you know, as far

49:41as the flood, even though they're going

49:42to have to come up higher, and I know

49:44some of the neighbors here are against

49:46it, uh,

49:50for the their particular reasons. Uh,

49:53but I did talk to him before. So he did

49:55call me and I did talk to him and and I

49:58recommended something like this whether

49:59it be three or four was in my discussion

50:03with him. So he wanted to try for four

50:06and you know I said leave it up to the

50:08uh CBA to do.

50:10>> Thank you. If we have no opposition

50:12listed here so if someone is opposed you

50:15had the right to speak. So if you're if

50:17you're opposed I'll reopen for

50:20opposition. But if you want to speak,

50:23you have to speak now.

50:25>> Richard Adriani, 21 Porterf. Uh, I have

50:28some concerns that I'd like addressed.

50:31We have a terrible parking problem down

50:33there. Emergency vehicles cannot make

50:36that turn because of the cars parked

50:38there. It's a one-way street and they

50:42have to turn around or back out to get

50:45out of there. And the Garfield Elliott

50:49uh hous the elderly housing

50:53is constantly being served by the fire

50:56department and ambulances.

50:59We also have a flooding problem there

51:01that is not as bad as it used to be, but

51:06it's it seems to be getting worse the

51:08more that the area is developed.

51:12I don't know how much of it the the area

51:14is going to be physically covered by the

51:16building itself, but that water has to

51:19go somewhere. And more than likely, even

51:22if it drains back into the drainage

51:25ditch, I I'm sure it all connects to

51:28Seals Creek and gets pumped to Deer

51:32Island.

51:34But if you see what they're doing at

51:36Suffach Downs, they're raising the grade

51:39so high, all that water has to go

51:41somewhere, too. There's an existing

51:44flooding problem there that's going to

51:46have to be addressed.

51:49>> As far as the board of appeals,

51:51>> yeah,

51:52>> we can only do that one.

51:54>> This will take the footprint now.

51:58[clears throat]

51:59>> Correct.

51:59>> These will all be open. He won't have a

52:01basement. They'll have crush stone for

52:03parking. And

52:04>> yeah, that's what they told us at the

52:06end of the street.

52:08>> They took the crush stone out and they

52:09paved it.

52:10>> And you can call the You can call the

52:12city and have that removed because it's

52:14against the regulations.

52:16They they will keep, but they have to

52:18keep

52:19>> How many off street parking spots are

52:21there going to be per unit?

52:22>> No off parking. There's two spaces for

52:24each unit. Not required anymore.

52:27>> Two [snorts] off street parking spaces.

52:29>> Yes.

52:30>> Okay.

52:32have the two spaces.

52:35>> They have tandem spaces.

52:36>> Yes.

52:37>> One under and one behind.

52:39>> Okay. Thank you.

52:41>> Thank you.

52:46>> Motion to approve.

52:48>> There's a roll call. Motion to approve.

52:54>> If the zoning board of appeals grants

52:55the relief requested, the following

52:57conditions will apply. If the rights

52:59authorized by this variance are not

53:00exercised within two years after the

53:02variance was granted, which shall not

53:04include the time required to pursue

53:06other entitlements necessary to

53:07construct the project authorized by the

53:09variance or await the determination of

53:11an appeal referred to in section 17 of

53:13chapter 48 of the general laws. Such

53:16rights shall lapse. This variance shall

53:18not be valid until the appellant has

53:19recorded this variance and plan in the

53:21Suffach County Registry of Deeds and

53:23submits document recording numbers and

53:25dates to the city clerk and building

53:26inspector of the city of Reier. The

53:28appellant must receive site plan review

53:30approval prior to applying for a

53:31building permit. Shall the zon and board

53:34of appeals grant the relief requested

53:35subject to those conditions?

53:37[clears throat] Mr. Lemonina,

53:38>> yes.

53:39>> Yes. Mr. Lopes.

53:40>> Yes.

53:40>> Yes. Mr. O'Brien.

53:42>> Yes.

53:42>> Yes. Mr. Pelton.

53:43>> Yes.

53:44>> Yes. And Chairman Tucker.

53:45>> Yes.

53:46>> Yes. The variance has been granted

53:47subject to those conditions.

53:53>> Thank you very much.

53:55>> I'm sorry. I didn't know you had five

53:56minutes.

53:58>> You did a great presentation.

54:01>> Next application is A2629 Parkway Homes

54:05Owner LLC 235 Bear Hill Road, Sweet 300,

54:08Walt Dam, Mass. requesting the following

54:10variance to enable the appellant to

54:12subdivide two Pratt Street, 12 Pratt

54:14Street, 16 Pratt Street, and 418 River

54:17Beach Parkway into proposed lots one and

54:20two. Uh the variances for with respect

54:23to minimum frontage requirement of 150

54:25ft within the TED district for the

54:27creation of proposed lot two.

54:31>> Good evening.

54:32>> Uh good evening, Chairman Tucker and

54:34members of the board. My name is Nancy

54:36O'Neal. I'm an attorney located at 14

54:38Proctor Avenue. I represent the

54:40applicant in this matter, Parkway Homes

54:42Owner LLC. Uh, and I'm joined here

54:45tonight by project engineer Rick Salvo.

54:48If you recall, uh, the lease trailer

54:49park property is the proposed site of a

54:52mixeduse transit oriented development

54:54that would feature 10% affordable

54:56housing. Such development was approved

54:58by the city council in 2024. Such

55:01approval uh was not appealed and has now

55:03become final. Uh as contemplated in the

55:052024 uh development plans, uh the

55:08development would take place uh on lot

55:12one um and lot two uh would be divided

55:16uh into a separate uh lot um which would

55:20be uh preserved in an undeveloped state

55:22um until if and when um a development

55:25was proposed for that lot. We come

55:27before the board tonight to request a

55:29frontage variance to accomplish uh the

55:31slot division. Um and as you can see on

55:34the plans here and as was set out in our

55:36support letter of September 23rd, which

55:38I hereby incorporate uh by reference

55:40into this presentation, uh the lot is in

55:42a regular seven-sided shape, which makes

55:44division into even useful lots difficult

55:47if not impossible without the granting

55:49of zoning relief. Uh here lot two would

55:52have 124 feet of frontage on green

55:56street uh where 150 feet would be uh

55:59required under uh zoning for the ted

56:02district. Uh nevertheless, after

56:05consultation with the site plan review

56:06committee and the fire department, we

56:08plan to establish sufficient access for

56:10lot two uh via easement uh over lot one

56:15um which would provide access through

56:18lot one to Pratt Street um and through

56:22lot one uh to Green Street.

56:25Uh so there was a primary access through

56:28Pratt, secondary access um through Green

56:32um and that would give emergency

56:33vehicles a turnaround space. Um but we

56:36again anticipate that traffic would be

56:38routed through Pratt Street. Um a

56:41traffic study on Pratt Street um and uh

56:44the driveway configuration here in 2024

56:47um found that Pratt Street access uh

56:49would be safe with sufficient sight

56:51lines for vehicle access and egress. Uh

56:53so we do not anticipate uh any issues uh

56:56with that Pratt Street access. Now I

56:58would like to clarify uh for everyone's

57:00understanding uh that we are not

57:01currently proposing new development for

57:03lot 2. We are requesting a variance uh

57:06tonight that would allow for division of

57:08the property into two lots as we

57:10originally proposed in 2024. Lot one um

57:14this front lot would be developed

57:16pursuant to the 2024 approvals. Um and

57:19any developments on lot two uh would

57:21need to come back before this board. Um

57:23so apartment development or uh

57:26commercial parking for instance those

57:28would need approval uh by this board

57:30andor um the city council. So we are not

57:33proposing anything for lot 2 tonight.

57:35All that we are proposing um is to

57:37divide the lots as was included in the

57:382024 plans for the Chiller Park uh

57:40development. Um and after discussion

57:43with the city um we have established uh

57:46sufficient access uh via easement over

57:48lot one uh for emergency vehicles,

57:51traffic um and things of that nature. So

57:54again, no development is proposed, just

57:56division of the lots. Um so we would

57:59respectfully request that this frontage

58:01variance is granted and we are happy to

58:03answer any questions that you may have.

58:04Thank you.

58:06>> Thank you. Seeing that it's a public

58:07hearing, I'll ask if there's any

58:08proponents. Anyone in favor? Seeing

58:11here. None of please step up for the

58:13microphone. State your name and address

58:14for the record.

58:16>> Travis Halpert 19 Street. Thank you

58:19guys. Thank you board chairman. Um I'm

58:23highly in favor of this as you heard. um

58:25you know there was there's been uh

58:28affordable uh discussions for this and

58:31um I'm somebody who used to visit the

58:33trailer park uh with food and do a lot

58:35of outreach in that area and after

58:37seeing the displacement and seeing the

58:39space underutilized it's it's been

58:40pretty sad you know why are people

58:43displaced if nothing's being uh done

58:44there and I think this is a step forward

58:47um also just the excitement after McMack

58:50and Field of Dreams I'm like what's next

58:52um that can be revived and used to bless

58:54the community. Um, and to be honest, um,

58:57you know, our our police officers and

58:59firefighters are having to make long

59:00commutes. And if we could build

59:02something here by this being subdivided

59:04and make municipal housing more readily

59:06available, we can have officers that

59:08don't have to commute from Danverse,

59:09that'd be great. So, you know, it's

59:11being sectioned off and I think that's a

59:12step forward to make it more available

59:14for productive development in the city

59:16of River. Thank you.

59:18>> Thank you. Any other proponents?

59:26Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Iron Novaski,

59:2853 Dohoni, Wad 2 counselor, but this is

59:30in ward one. If I let you know, um I

59:34know the area. My ward is directly

59:36across the street, the border lines on

59:38the River Beach Parkway. And um I don't

59:41have a problem with this. I understand

59:43some of the thoughts of what they plan

59:45on doing there. And uh with those two

59:48thoughts which I'll hold back until they

59:50want to release it but uh I have no

59:52problem with this. Thank you.

59:54>> Thank you.

59:57>> Seeing and hearing no more proponent

1:00:00then I would ask if there's any

1:00:01opponents.

1:00:03Seeing and hearing then I'll close that

1:00:04side of the hearing. As far as members I

1:00:08So the front all we're doing is doing

1:00:10the sub the dividing of the lots. That's

1:00:12all we're approving this evening. If

1:00:14anything is to be proposed or changed

1:00:18that goes

1:00:19>> for the come back to the city somehow.

1:00:23Okay.

1:00:24What's the will of the motion to

1:00:27approve? That's for a roll call.

1:00:33If the rights authorized by this

1:00:34variance are not exercised within two

1:00:36years after the variance was granted,

1:00:38which shall not include the time

1:00:39required to pursue other entitlements

1:00:41necessary to construct the project

1:00:43authorized by the variance or await the

1:00:45determination of an appeal referred to

1:00:47in section 17 of 4A of the general laws.

1:00:49Such such rights shall lapse. This

1:00:52variance [clears throat] shall not be

1:00:53valid until the appellant has recorded

1:00:54this variance and plan on the Suffach

1:00:56County Registry of Deeds and submits

1:00:57document recording numbers and dates to

1:00:59the city clerk and building inspector of

1:01:01the city of River.

1:01:03>> Shall the zoning board of appeals grant

1:01:05the relief requested subject to those

1:01:06conditions? Mr. Leina?

1:01:08>> Yes.

1:01:08>> Yes. Mr. Lopes.

1:01:10>> Yes. Mr. O'Brien.

1:01:11>> Yes.

1:01:11>> Yes. Mr. Pelton?

1:01:12>> Yes.

1:01:13>> Yes. And Chairman Tucker?

1:01:14>> Yes.

1:01:14>> Yes. The variance has been granted

1:01:15subject to those conditions. There's no

1:01:17further business. Chairman,

1:01:19>> no further business. Our next meeting

1:01:20will be

1:01:22>> October 28th.