Test 1212. Good evening and welcome to the River Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. Could you please rise and salute the flag? To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it
stands. One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Roll call of the members. Mr. Lemna here. Mr. Lopes here. Mr. O'Brien here. Here. Mr. Pelton here. Miss Pratt, alternate member
here. and chairman Tucker here. Here a quorum is present. First item on tonight's agenda is continued from the meeting of August 27th application of the city of Rivier requesting a height variance uh to allow the city to construct a 145 foot radio tower for the
new emergency 911 center at 65 Street. Good evening. Good evening. Tom Skowski, 281 Broadway, chief of planning and community development. Um hopefully you were able to see my presentation uh along with
Mayor Keefe and our public safety officials to the River City Council um earlier in the month. Um in addition to the presentation that I provided to you all in August. Um hopefully we've got the technical details down and
understood. Um I won't go into those in greater detail unless you have questions and I'm happy to answer them. um what we said to the city council in that meeting um and what I'll say to you all tonight um you know we are asking today for a
variance on the height and the setback um requirements related to the this radio tower that we need in the interest of public safety and we're asking um hopefully to remove um those
requirements through a variance tonight um but also are making a commitment ment to the ZBA and and to the council who we will ultimately have to return to for a vote um for the full McKinley rebuild project uh as they'll have to approve a bond issuance to complete the project.
We are doing everything within our power to see if we can lower the height of the tower. Um, we're conducting a microwave path analysis, um, as well as a peer review with our owner's project manager at PMA, um, to see if there are
alternative paths that we can take to lower the height of the tower. We're pretty confident we need a tower. Uh, we're pretty confident it will be a tower that is greater than 110 ft. Um, but you know, we are looking at
opportunities to potentially lower the height of the tower, but not in a way that would um risk any sort of public safety um needs that we have uh with our 911 call center. So, I'm sure you all saw what happened um in New York City
with with the convening of the UN where the Secret Service had, you know, uncovered uh a plot essentially to cut off cell service throughout throughout the region for that event. I'm not here to suggest that uh River City Hall or that 911 call center is akin to the UN
of course, but just to remind you all that we are in um you know some dangerous and at times scary times. Um and there are some real and and evolving public safety challenges that our public safety officials have to face. And this
system is really made to create redundancy. So we don't have to rely on any one communication system to make sure that in the case of an emergency, whether um you know a mass casualty event, an earthquake, um obviously uh
hurricanes and and more extreme storm events. We want to make sure that our 911 officials are well equipped to handle the emergency response needs both here and in Chelsea and in Winthrop. um as this is a regional center. So um we are doing everything we c we we can to
see if that uh height could be lowered um but at this time we're asking for the variance of the height as it stands today at 145 ft and happy to take any questions that you might have. Thank you. Seeing that's a public hearing. Are there any proponents?
Anyone in favor? Good evening councelor. the button. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members, uh Paula Jenzio, 245 Reservoir Avenue, uh Wad for City Councelor. Uh let me just say at at the outset that I fully in
favor of the McKinley School project. I always have been and I still am today. Uh it's a great thing for the city, a new 911 call center, uh city offices, and early childhood classrooms, which the city desperately needs. Uh, I was a
little bit disappointed that the 145- ft tower came to light just at the end of this project. It caught me and it caught the residents uh by surprise. Uh, and I couldn't just uh shrug off their concerns. I also got calls from early
childhood teachers concerned about the uh radio waves and safety for the students. Um and I asked the ZBA for a continuence which you granted. Thank you very much. So the council had the chance
to ask questions of the design team and specifically in Troba who designed this uh tower and are the communications experts. Unfortunately, they were not able to come to the council meeting the especially in Troba uh wasn't able to
show which was uh disappointing and in my view unprofessional. But we did get some uh good information uh the night of the council meeting. Uh the mayor made a presentation and he said that he uh started a or granted a
study that could be done that Mr. Scorski just commented on. I want to thank him for that to see if there is an alternative or at least to get the tower reduced uh a few feet anyway uh in recognition of the neighborhood
concerns. Um but we did get some excellent information from the police and fire. Uh Mr. Mazola who works uh currently down at the fire and police station down in the Parkway. He said when that project
was built, a tower was supposed to be built there and it never was built for some reason. And the police and fire uh when they go on their backup system, which was a surprise to me, does not have adequate communication now, and they haven't for years. And the police
and fire told stories about how they would go into buildings and were not able to communicate with each other. So obviously that is a huge safety risk to our first responders and we certainly that is the first thing that we need to
focus on. So I look forward to the uh project coming to its fruition. Um I hope the study shows that the tower can come down a few feet anyway and I support the McKinley school and I hope it I like to see it to its fruition. Thank you.
Thank you. Are there any other proponents? Seeing and hear none, I'll close that side of the hearing. Any opponents? Seeing and hearing none, I'll close that side of the hearing. Any members wish to speak? There's a motion on the floor to
approve. Second. Roll call, please. Shall the zoning board of appeals grant the relief requested to the city of River for the construction of a 100, I'm sorry, maximum height variance? Mr. Lemon? Yes. Mr. Lopes. Yes. Mr. Mr. O'Brien.
Yes. Mr. Pelton. Yes. And Chairman Tucker. Yes. Yes. The variance has been granted. Next application is A2522. It's a special permit. the application of Francisco Rosa 41 Liberty A requesting a special permit from the ZBA pursuant to
section 17440 to enable the appellant to remove an existing 12x 12 sunroom and construct a new 12x 24 addition at 41 Liberty A. Good evening. If you kindly press the button once, the red light will come on. State your name and address for the
record, please. Uh Francis Corrosa, 61 Liberty Avenue. Uh so my name is Francis Corrosa. I'm the owner of the property. Uh I've had it since almost nine years. Um the property is a small home and um it's got
the sun room that uh is additional space that was previously a deck and the city granted a permit that it be converted to a sun room. It's part of the house and it has uh sliding door inside right next to the kitchen. Uh what I would like to do is to be able to remove that sliding
door uh so that it can just be used uh throughout the year. Part of the reason that it has it is because because it's a sun room, it can only be used with modest weather. If it's too hot, it gets very hot. In the winter, it's practically useless because it just
isn't uh weatherproof. Uh in moving forward to rebuild, uh I would like to just add that extra 12 feet on the other side and open up the living room. So it basically ups and loops over. So the goal would be to remove and rebuild that
section completely and just adding on to it. Um the home is already there. Um I believe the difference is that it requires 15 ft setback and we're at 10 or 11 feet setback. So it's already there. I'm just taking advantage of
expanding it if I'm granted the chance to just rebuild. Thank you. Seeing that this is a public hearing, are there any proponents? Anyone in favor? Seeing in here not, I'll close that side of the hearing. Any opponents? Anyone opposed?
Seeing in here, I'll close that side of the hearing. Any members, Mr. Speak? There's a motion on the floor to approve. Seconded. Yes. Okay. Roll call, please. Shall the zoning board of appeals grant
the relief requested? Oh, I'm sorry. Are you doing conditions? The is the board doing conditions? What would our the standard conditions? Standard conditions would be as follows. If the rights authorized by the special permit are not exercised within two years of the date of the grant of this variance, the special permit, the right
shall lapse. The special permit shall not be valid until the appellant has recorded the special permit and plan in the Suffach County Registry of Deeds and submits document recording numbers and dates to the city clerk and building inspector of the city of Rivier. And lastly, the property must the appelllet must receive site plan review approval
prior to applying for a building permit. Shall the zoning board of appeals grant the special permit subject to those conditions? Mr. Lemonina? Yes. Yes. Mr. Lopes. Yes. Mr. O'Brien. Yes. Yes. Mr. Pelton. Yes. And Chairman Tucker. Yes. Yes. The special permit has been granted subject to those conditions.
Thank you very much. Last application for tonight is A2523 on the application of Andrea Garcia 150 Arnold Street River Mass requesting the following variances to enable the appellant to convert the existing single family dwelling to a two family dwelling
at 149 Fenley Street. uh looking for front yard parking minimum requirement of front yard be landscaped of 40% and maximum driveway width cannot exceed 20 feet. Good evening council Andrea Garcia
150 Arnold Street River. So I am here to um request the granting of um like you guys just mentioned to park to request parking in front of the property. So, there's existing tand two
tandem parking spots on the left side of the property, and we're requesting for two additional spots towards the right, but it'll all be in the front that front left of the of the home. And we have met with the city engineers, with um with
Don and with Nick Rytorm as well, and we came up with a plan. And I've also uploaded the um the proposed uh proposal on the plot plan as well. So I'm hoping
we can get the get it granted today. Okay. Seeing it as a public hearing, are there any proponents? Anyone in favor? Seeing and hearing none, I'll close that side of the hearing. Are there any opponents? If you'd kindly step up to the
microphone, state your name and address for the record. Good evening everyone. Robert Hos, 161 Fenley Street and I am um an opponent of this proposition and this application. I feel like zoning, the purpose of zoning
is to prevent the overcrowding of land. And this is a spot where we have to protect our neighborhoods and not let them go get overrun with um too much car, too many cars and too many people in one residence, but to prevent the
overcrowding of land and to also conserve and provide open space. I'm a little concerned regarding the property at 149 Fenley Street to the left. If you can see the picture for those of you who have the packet, there's a long driveway where you could
easily fit four cars, maybe even five. Um I feel like the additional two spots in front once that driveway is paved over or or ready to go, that cars will be parked there and there also be the additional two spots out front. And I
know the applicant had said that there will be no parking on the street. But who's to say that they get this approved and they get those two spots in the front and then apply for residential
parking permits. Um it's also a quality of life issue for the neighbors. Um some of whom are here tonight. They've they've heard dumpster pickups shortly after 6:00 a.m. in the morning. Work all week. Just last Sunday, I had
my windows open. I had to shut my windows due to the noise on a Sunday on a sunny sunny Sunday afternoon. But I'm opposed to the variances being requested because substantially dergate from these intents and purposes of the zoning ordinances which is to prevent
the overcrowding of land and essentially the neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you. There any other opposition? Good evening. Is this name and address for the record? Yes. Yes. Good evening and thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak
tonight. My name is George M. Manzone. I'm res I'm a property owner of 141 Fenley Street. Um and I've lived in this piece of property for over 70 years. Uh I am opposed to this zoning
um variance because of the fact that it prevents the according to the city zoning audiences the intent and purpose of zoning is to prevent over as you know prevent overcrowowning of land and conserve and provide open space. I am
opposed the variances being requested because of stancy derogate derogate from the derogate from these intents and propose of zoning ordinances. The applicant has only mentioned financial hardship as a reason for the
variance. The applicant has not shown that the property has unique circumstances relating to soil conditions, shape or topography
preventing the installation of two parking spaces. In fact, the hardship arises solely from the fact that I feel the lot is too small to fit the required number of parking spaces for two family use. The ZBA has
no I don't feel the ZBA has authority to grant rearances for this reason and for these reason I I respectfully request the application be denied. Now going further with just a little background of the neighborhood because I've been there
for 70 years. Just give me a second. I don't mean to take up any time. Uh first of all, my opposition to the experience doesn't cast any super uh spursions on the people that own the
property. Uh the people who are living at the property or any of the people who are contractors at the property. It doesn't show any experience to them and it's not part of what I'm talking about. So I I want to make that clear. The uh
first reason, another reason, the neighborhood consists primarily of single family homes and this fact alone provides a serene atmosphere for the neighborhood. And historically, it has been an area
where families were raised their children and their children actually, and I'm one of them, actually stayed in the neighborhood and where I raised my children. Okay, another reason
the property have pretty much a pristine uh aspect to it and impairments and have single curb cuts on all the property surrounding that are single family homes. And another reason, in my opinion, the
curb, the curb appeal that this property will take away not only from itself, but from the homes that have been in that area for a number of years and had remained single families. We have
um a number of families that are living there with children and it's a nice quiet serene place to raise them. So at this time I would just thank you so much for giving me the opportunity to speak in front of your honorable body
and again I am against this I'm in opposition to to the uh variation there any other opponents see sorry thank you opponents opposed
opposed okay kindly step up to the mic state your name and address for for record, please. Oh, John. Okay. My name is John Macharia. Um 152 Fenry Street, Rivia. Um
I'm sorry. This is the first time that I'm telling this case, but so I oppose because I uh I live across um the property that's in question. I'm the immediate uh neighbor across the street. And I post because already we have
experienced um the other day the other night we me and I have two daughter and my wife's right there and the street is already uh crowded and there were so many cars even broke my driveway. Um um the noise is another
thing. There was so much noisy and yet it's not even finished. So, I'm worried if um this if they're granted to do it a multi family, then it going to be a lot of uh things going on and and u I'm not ready
to have those um short-term neighbors that I don't know. I wish that we have someone that um we we that I that I should relate with. Um yeah, so um yeah, that's my thing. Thank
you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Are there any other opponents? Seeing none, I'll close that side of the hearing. Um the wad counselor did um state that he's in opposition and
basically for trying to preserve the open space and the greenery of the front of homes. Um, as so I would ask if there is a motion or do any of the other members wish to speak?
I was by there earlier today. Is the parking that you're applying for on the right hand side? Left hand side. The left hand side there was a dumpster. Mhm. Right. Yeah. So where would the additional parking be? It's going to be on the towards like
on the front of the house. I don't know if you guys have the plot plan. So, directly in front of the house. Right in front. Yeah. Okay. Okay. It's going to be like an L-shaped the existing parking that's there. We can uh that's that driveway that's already there on the left hand side. We can do
one car in front of the other and then right next to it. But in front of the house. In front of the house. Okay. Mhm. Okay. I'm opposed to anything in front of the house. Mhm. Okay. Is there work being done on the right side of the house? It looks like there's
work being done on the right side. So, originally um we were going to do parking on the right hand side, but um this all happened and we met, you know, with like the building commissioner as well and then with um engineers um and that
wasn't going to be approved. That wasn't wasn't going to be wasn't going to happen. So, we came up with this new plan, but the right side is going to maintain green space. Exactly. But it looks like you've already done some work on that because we were go because we had already it had already already been
approved and then um there's a gas line that runs there. So, National Grid was going to move that gas line. We had already done a few, you know, things. But, well, who would have approved that cuz it's not wide enough for what? That's the thing. It got approved from the beginning. So all right, but
we're trying to, you know, okay, move forward and try to do the right thing now. All right. Thank you. Is there a motion to approve? And then a motion to approve and then if you wish wish to deny the vote would be if you would explain it.
If the board wants to deny it, the question is still in the in the affirmative. Recommendation of the board is I still ask the question in the affirmative, right? It's up to the board. Okay. So, motion to approve. We ask for a roll
call. Shall the zoning board of appeals grant the relief requested? Mr. Lemonina? No. No. Mr. Lopes? No. No. Mr. O'Brien? No. No. Mr. Pelton, no. And Chairman Tucker, no.
No. The variance has been denied. Having no further business, we will see once again in October 22nd. Thank you.