Test one, two, three. There we go. Good evening and welcome to the Rever Zoning Board of Appeals meeting, April 23rd. Could we please rise and salute the flag? I pledge allegiance 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. [Music] Roll club the members. Mr. Lemina here,
Mr. Lopes here, Mr. O'Brien here, Mr. Pelton here. Here, Miss Pratt, alternate member is absent. And chairman Tucker here. Here corum is present. First item on the agenda is application A2507 John Duran 59 Howard
Street Reier Mass requesting a variance of Reier revised zoning ordinances section 172410 rear yard deck setback for decks to enable the appellant to construct a 12 1/2 ft by 19 ft deck at 24 Charlotte
Street. Is the applicant present? Any representatives present? Yes. Are you the applicant? Yes, I am. Please step up to the microphone. Press the right the button so that the microphone comes on right at the
bottom. There's a button there. Okay. Okay. You're online. Keep it on. There you go. All right. State your name and address for the record, please. Okay. My name is John Duran. I'm the um construction man um general contractor for 24 Chile um street. and applying to
get a venance for a rare deck which is sufficient yard. Okay. Um just so the plans are not to our specifications. So if we were to approve this, you'd have to get the plot plan done to our specifications. Yes,
sir. Okay. It's just that it has to have zoning and all of that on it. No problem. Okay. Seeing that this is a public hearing, are there any proponents? Anyone in favor? Seeing and hear close that side of the
hearing. Any opponents? Anyone opposed? Seeing and hear close that side of the hearing. That's what I thought. Okay, members. Um, Mr. to speak. I did not get any calls from the wad counselor
or any opposition or um proponents. So what's the wish of the members? That if he if we were to vote on this, he has to do the plans according to our specifications before they would be able to approve it.
So there's a motion to approve pending him doing the plans to our specifications and our standard order of conditions. Standard conditions are as follows. If the rights authorized by this variance are not exercised with
within one year of the date of the grant of this variance, the right shall lapse. This variance shall not be valid until the appellent has recorded this variance in plan in the Suffach County registry of deeds and submits recording numbers and dates to the city clerk and building inspector of the city of Ray. The appellant must receive site plan review
approval prior to applying for a building permit and the site plan shall be the sh the site plan shall be done in accordance with the specifications of the zoning board of appeals. Shall the zoning board of appeals grant the relief
requested subject to those conditions? Mr. Lemma? Yes. Yes. Mr. Lopes? Yes. Yes. Mr. O'Brien? Yes. Yes. Mr. Pelton? Yes. Yes. And Chairman Tucker? Yes. Yes. The variance has been granted subject to those conditions. So, I suggest whoever
did your drawing in Alexander, have them go on review.org, look up the zoning board of appeals. There is detailed instructions on what he has to do for the plan. If that's not done, just you won't get anything. Okay, sir. Okay.
Thank you. Have a good night. All right. That's the next item number anyway. Sorry. No. Um well, well, wait a minute. What's the last one? Why don't we take that up now and then
we can deal with the one in the middle. Next application is going to be A2509 Andrew Pedra, 150 Span Street, Framingham, Mass. requesting a special permit from the zoning board of appeals to enable the appellent to expand an existing non-conforming single family
dwelling by constructing a second story addition at 90 gauge. Good evening. If you could state your name and address for the record, please. Yes. My name is Andrew Pedra and this is for 90 gauge a river, but my address is uh 100 Russell Road, Framingham.
Okay. Do you wish to add everything or the the plan speaks for itself? Um, for the most part, the plan speaks for itself. We're doing a second story addition over part of this home, you know, to create more living space above, more bedroom space, added bathroom, also a loft area above that, and the third
story. It's going to be a nice view of, you know, of everything. So, just creating more living space for a single family home. Okay. Seeing that this is a public hearing, I'll ask if there's any proponents, anyone in favor If you if you're in favor, please step
up to the microphone and state your name and address for the record, please. It's my house, so I'm not sure. Okay. Sure. Sure. Lucas Pada 90 gauge job or 86 on the
door. I'm proponent. Great. Are there any other proponents? Seeing here none, I'll close that side of the hearing. Any opponents? Anyone opposed? Seeing and hear none, I'll close that side of the hearing. Any members wish to
speak? I did not receive anything from the ward counselor in motion to approve. There's a motion to approve. Roll call, please. With our standard conditions, the standard conditions would be as
follows. for a special permit. If the rights authorized by the special permit are not exercised within two years of the date of the grant to this special permit, the right shall lapse. The special permit shall not be valid until the appellant has recorded this variance 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 Reier and the appellent must receive site plan review approval prior to applying for a building permit. Shall the zoning board of appeals grant a special permit subject to those conditions? Mr. Lemonina. 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. You got it. Thank you very much. Next application is that is
A2508 Amar and Brothers LLC care of Diamio LLP 14 Proctor a reair mass requesting variances of the river revised zoning ordinances to enable the appellant to construct a 31 unit apartment building within the neighborhood business district at 140
Beach Street. Good evening. State your name and address for the record, please. Good evening. Attorney Jerry Damrosio, 14 Proctor Avenue, River, Massachusetts. Uh, I've submitted a motion to the board. Uh, but I'd like to give some background on it first. We're asking
that the petition be withdrawn. And I think that once I explain the background uh uh of this matter, you'll understand why. Uh, this is a a a particularly interesting piece of property. Uh, it's the old Little Peach site in River, Massachusetts. It's of particular
interest to me because I grew up right around the corner from from this site. I grew up on Taft Street. Uh I used to walk by it almost every day and I used to buy candy and and and and snacks there uh every day. So it had a particular interest to me. In August of
last year, as many of you know, the building uh was on the market for sale. It had been converted from a Little Peach to another variety store to finally a 7-Eleven. 7-Eleven was closing down uh a number of stores throughout the uh east coast and they had
designated uh to close this one as well. Uh except that in closing it they made clear to any potential buyers that there'd be a deed restriction in the chain of title. No convenience store could be allowed there again running
into the future. So, it's important to understand that this particular parcel as it's currently encumbered by the previous owners does not allow for any kind of Little Peach 7-Eleven or convenience store. It's unfortunate, sad. Um, but that was a restriction that
was put in place by the previous owners. At the same time, the property was marketed uh with a number of realtors and there were a number of inquiries. I actually got a couple of calls. I got a call from one particular person who was banking on the city council allowing for
recreational marijuana in the city of River. Banking on that, they wanted to potentially explore the purchase and the creation of a recreational marijuana dispensary there. To be quite frank, I don't represent recreational marijuana
dispensaries and so I declined. Um I did not take that representation. The matter moved on at that point. I for whatever reason that person didn't buy the property. I can tell you that another uh medical use facility looked at the property as well and contacted me. They
wanted uh to consider a transitional use facility as as many are being planned in in not only this city but the adjoining cities. What I what I told these folks was no, it's probably not the right spot for it. This is a community area. it
should be kept that way in the long run and and be really cognizant of what the neighbors want. And they said, "How could I be so sure of that?" Well, I said to them that I've represented others in the city of River that have come in with this idea and it works in places and it doesn't work in others and
I suggested it wouldn't work here at the old little league, Little Peach site. Well, they took my advice and and uh ultimately didn't buy the parcel. Then in August of last year, I did get a call from uh a developer in Boston, a builder
who said, you know, we're interested in the site and we'd uh because of its close proximity to the Beach Bond train station, we'd like to consider a site that will bring absolutely no congestion to the area because we're going to not allow cars and to build uh uh an
appropriate uh uh building that will allow for smaller units to help alleviate the housing crisis. And what they meant by smaller units or onebedroom geared for young adults who work in town and are going to take the MBTA. In other words, they're going to
hop on that train, that bus, drive up the street to Beachmart, get onto that train station and drive into Boston. No cars, no parking. That was the idea. I said, you know, I think it's a good idea. I think it's a good idea not only for River or Everett or Malden or Boston
or Quincy. It's a good idea period given where we are today in the state of uh in the state of Massachusetts with our h housing crisis. But this was an especially good client because this client wanted to work with the community. And so what this client instructed me to do is to first reach
out to city hall and to talk to the powers that be in city hall and see if they'd be open to the idea. And they said, "Sure, we'd be open to the idea, but let's have a community meeting." To which we responded, "Absolutely." Now, mind you, this is back in October of
2024. We're almost six six months ago now, seven months ago. So, that's when the initial talks uh began. Soon after my talks with city hall, we went out and talked to the ward counselor. And the ward counselor said, "Well, Jerry, you know, we've got to talk. I don't want something that's too big or too
burdensome. I'd like to have a community meeting." So, we said, "Absolutely. Let's work with the community." So, we noticed the community meeting for the end of uh for the middle of November. Uh we we publicized it. We we we mailed out letters. We asked the clerk's office to
issue the addresses. And and again, if I if I could if I if anybody is going to speak out in the audience, you will be asked to leave. So, please be quiet. Everyone will have the opportunity to speak, but if you speak out, you will be
asked to leave the table. So, the reason I I I offer this is because I'm explaining why we're going to withdraw this motion today. That meeting was done in November. We only had two people that came, only two. That being said, we continued to work with the two people
that came, the city councelor. We significantly changed those plans. We changed them in significant ways. We made the building smaller, less units. We we accommodated one of the neighbors as the current building is on her property line. we we try to push it
over. We did a number of things. It took several months to do uh a and at a great cost. So, that being said, we filed the petition and then last week we heard that there was uh uh neighborhood opposition to it. And so, again, we stand here before you saying that we are
willing to work with the neighbors. We are willing to have a community meeting. You know, we're hoping more people attend the community meeting. Now, I don't know why people didn't know about it. I don't know why it was busy time of year. Maybe they didn't see it on a website. Maybe they were outside of the
300 foot ratio that the clerk's office mails to. There could be many, many reasons that only two people showed up and and because it's just the opposite. My client wants many people to show up because we want to be collaborative and we want to work with the neighborhood um
to get input on an idea that will go here. Um, look, the reality is this is a a valuable piece of property that can be used for things that don't require permits or don't require zoning relief. And and that being said, right, it's not
a question of is something going to go there because something is going to go there. It's a question of trying to find something that's a good fit for everyone. And so, we have a motion to withdraw the current uh project before you uh with the caveat that we're going
to withdraw. We're going to work with the ward council in city hall. We're going to publicize another meeting. Uh uh and we're hoping that people will come and and listen to what the project is and then get input and then make some changes again. Right. We I have a client
that's already made one set of changes. I'm sure he's going to be happy to make more changes, but at the same time, we'd like to get everybody on board and have people participate in the process. Uh and and I think that uh given the turnout today, given uh uh what I've
heard from councelor McKenna, that people will be more involved next time around and and I hope they are. We we we really want them to be involved. So that being said, I'm asking that this project be withdrawn and uh uh it'll be refiled down the road when we get community
input on what they would like to see there, size, scope, and issues like that. And that that may take a few months to be quite frank because we need to do the meeting and then change plans again. So based on that, I'm I'm respectfully requesting that this board
uh uh allow us to withdraw our project plans. Uh mind you if the board decides not to if people want to object to that then at that point the the property is still buildable but for other things
that maybe people don't want that don't require this honorable board's approval. So again it's about working with the community and that's what we're offering. We hope we people recognize that in good faith because that's why I'm here. This is a good faith gesture
to do that. Thank you, councelor. Good evening. Good evening, councelor McKenna. Ward one. Well, we we're going to I have to ask for proponents. Oh. Um, so is there anyone in favor?
In favor of what? Withdrawal? Nope. In favor of the project itself. Seeing here, none, I'll close that side hearing. Any opponents? If if you're going to oppose, we could do it by a raise of hands or if you're
going to go up and speak. You are limited to the three minutes. Um and it has to be for just this. It can't be talking about anything else. It's just strictly with what we're dealing with tonight. So, if we'll do a raise of
hands. One 2 3 4 5 19 12 13 14 15 17 18 19 2 258 29 40 41 42 43 all together. Um now if people are going to
get up and speak the first award counselor will speak and then if you just stand behind the speakers you state your name and address for the record and you will have the three minutes time frame. Good evening councelor. Good evening. Um, so I would like to clarify
a couple of things. First of all, something has to be built there. Uh, second of all, we did have a community meeting in November and only two people showed up. I don't know what the range was to um contact uh people, but I know
that in the last couple of weeks when this came out, I've gotten a number of calls and emails. I've talked to people and everybody was against it. Um, and I was too, frankly, because I thought it was too big for the area. It would have
suffocated that whole corner. Um, but what I've learned from the people that I've talked to is, and I didn't even realize it because I live in Beachmont, um, this is a historical um, center.
It's a a a historical um, intersection. and what they would like to see if whatever is built there um is something more historical than um modern uh to go with the community. The other thing I
would like to say is that I will personally put something up on Facebook and have people give couple of dates out for people to want to have a community a neighborhood meeting. not a community meeting, a neighborhood meeting where
you can come up um and we can get together whether if if it's up here or somewhere down um near Immaculate Conception and have get your input of what should be there, but something's going to go there and and it's up to you
to tell us what you would like to see there. So, I I don't know if you guys are uh on my Facebook page, but I will definitely set something up where we can have a couple of dates of community the community, the neighborhood come together. Not the community, the
neighborhood, the neighborhoods come together and have their input on what they would like to see there. Thank you very much. Okay, just to clarify, you're not coming up to this microphone to tell me what you'd like
there. No, you do that at your public meeting. What's here tonight is based on the application that's in front of us. Just so we can stay on track. It has to do be to do with the application. Thank you. Good evening. If you could state your name and address
for the record. Yeah, my name is Corey O'Hara, 270 Beach Street. Um before I start, I just wanted to know if you guys have the zoning board application that was submitted um by MRM brothers in front of you cuz I will be referencing that.
Okay. Do Yes. Okay. Um so I understand the developers have requested to withdraw their application without prejudice which would allow them to resubmit the same or a similar proposal in the future. Despite this, I believe there's an important to address some procedural
oversightes that have occurred up to this point. Firstly, I noted the zoning board of appeals received a copy of the deed, which I will be referring referring to moving forward. Um I I do have I will be referring to the restrictive covenant covenant in a
minute that uh attorney Dimrosio mentioned. But uh firstly I want to note that in 2024 a hazardous substances clause was added to that deed waving all liabilities from the seller. This raises a question. Have any environmental
assessments been required or conducted on this site? I spoke with members from site plan review, the building department, and Rivera fire. None have seen an environmental assessment for this site. However, under Massachusetts regulations, particularly the Oil and
Hazardous Material Release Prevention and Response Act, developers converting properties to residential use, especially those with hazardous substances causes in their deeds, are typically required to conduct
environmental assessments. such environmental uh excuse me such as uh a phase one environmental assessments during site plan review process. I urge the board to require a
disclosure of any environmental reports or an official statement confirming that none exist or no suspected contaminants are on this site before considering any future proposals. Next, I want to highlight a significant
restrictive covenant entered into the deed in 2024. Were you aware of this restricted covenant? Did the building inspector inform you of this restricted covenant? Because this restricted covenant conflicts with our existing zoning
ordinances in 2024. This restricted covenant ban any uh covenant banned any food, beverage, or fuel sales, the exact kinds of shops that this neighborhood business zoning is supposed to support. So, what we're
doing here is we're allowing these developers to come in and tell us what we can do with these neighborhoods that we specifically zoned for convenience. So these this neighborhood business zone that we said would provide convenience
to our neighborhoods, this covenant comes in by the way of the deed and it it says to us we no longer can put food, grocery or gasoline here and we can we can only now put
residential. that takes away the original use of this land that that was put forth by the zone zoning codes. We're allowing these developers to tell us what we can do with our land. Now, that that goes
over. Can I cut you short? It's not the developer. the person that sold the property. Okay. But the owner put that has we cannot deny that unlawfully. That may have been done unlawfully. And that's one of the things
I'm asking you to do before you close this hearing today. I'm asking you to have this this legally reviewed because when something's put in such as a neighborhood uh business zoning, that's
done in public interest. That's done for us to provide convenience for us. And when when someone puts in a deed that says, "Oh, no, you can no longer use this land to provide convenience to these neighborhoods." that might have been done unlawfully because it's
circumventing our zoning codes by way of the deed and I and and I believe that was done unlawfully. There have been cases where where courts have removed that from the deed because it circumvents our zoning laws in this
city. Okay, that's not something we can take up here. But it is it is it's not something we can take up. It's something. What you can do though is you can say no to this withdrawal and keep this case open while someone reviews
that deed to whether that's lawful for them to do because they can't circumvent our zoning laws to say now only residential property can go here because we say that no groceries, gasoline,
um, or food products can be sold here any longer, which which eliminates neighborhood business zoning in itself. Not not totally, but yes, you're right there. Right. Originally, you could have put a mixeduse property there. Not 100%. I don't want you to take up all your
time, but Originally, you could have put a mixeduse property there, not 100% residential. That really shouldn't have been an option, but by way of the deed and the language that they put in there via the restrictive covenant, that's how they were able to get the residential usage in there. So someone who has who
just by way of that that language. Uh anyway, the other thing I would like to ask for is is to get the uh environmental reports because it's suspicious that they added hazardous
substances clauses into that deed as well. I went back to look for previous deeds and there was no hazardous substance languages in there. This is something that is all being broken down. Um there's no like between the lack of
oversight and the checks and balances that um site plan review and the building inspector is supposed to provide before it gets to this board. They're supposed to alert you of this language that's in the deed. That's my concern is there's there's a breakdown in the oversight and the checks and
balances in this process. And that's how this has gotten to this point. There's there's restrictive covenant language. There's hazardous substances language in these deeds. And the other part of this application that's concerning is there was hardship language, financial
hardship language that was put in here by the attorney that was also used in another application for 100 River Street that saying that that these developers are going to be put under some kind of hardship if you don't approve these
applications for them. But they're they're putting themselves under this hardship by asking for these variances on these small parcels of land where these these residential properties don't belong in the first place. There is no financial hardship that they will be
under. This is a strategy now that these law firms and these attorneys are using to persuade you to approve these variances. This is now a strategy that they're using. This isn't in fact financial hardship. So these are the
points that I'm asking what I'm asking you to do is vote no on this motion to withdraw. Keep this hearing open until these matters are resolved. The first matter would be a a legal review of this unlawful what I believe is unlawful
restrictive covenant that is going to over rule your authority to change our zoning via the the deed that I believe is wrong. They shouldn't be able to tell us what we can do with our land. And the other is to require that environmental report. Whether there's a substance or
not, could just be lead paint. Why would they put that hazardous substances clause in that deed? It's very curious. And the other thing is is to be more have more oversight and checks and balances over these permits and these
requests because they're using these terms that financial hardship is really just a strategy to get these variances approved and and I just I don't disagree with you with that but they do have the right to put that but it's but but they they do everybody does it. I understand
that. But it's Sorry, I just I want to say one more thing before I sit down because I just believe it's important. They refer to a specific case in two different properties and they use the specific
case. They all do that. I understand that. But it's it's not a unique hardship anymore. them it's no longer a unique hardship. I'm not disagreeing with you on that. So it's it's not a real constraint. It's then becomes a legal strategy. They're they're no
longer working for the city. They're working for the developers so that they can make a a profit. It's not right. There needs to be more oversight over these projects. They're they're taking our city and they're doing what they
want with it. It's it's not right. and we owe it to our neighborhood and our city to expose these deed provisions before they exploit this process any further. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, if you could please step up
to the microphone, state your name and address for the record. Okay. James Caramelo, 11 Eaton Street. I'm a retired firefighter. I'm a member of the public employee committee. I'm also a representative for re retirees, but I am not here on their behalf. I'm here as a
resident. I'm getting a little sick and tired of every time a building goes up, we're talking about new age millennials that don't drive. Please, come on. People drive. Whether it's the new Suffach Downs project, there's not going
to be any people driving there. They're not going to own cars. What you put up a traffic light for? Okay, this is getting a little ridiculous. There's gridlock in this city. You have a school and a church right adjacent to this
construction site. And I also take offense at the esteemed attorney who scares the people at this meeting into thinking that something could go there that we don't want. Isn't any project that goes there going to come under your
jurisdiction for your approval? Not at all. Not at all. Not at all. Well, isn't there any project there that would have to have some sort of community uh notification? So, there could be some feedback or some uh push back. There's
some that go as a matter of right with the government's with the government. Well, as uh Mrs. Lales said and very well stated, you know, this board has some work to do and I hope you do your due diligence. Thank you. Thank you.
Good evening. Name and address for the record, please. Sally Bzowski, 176 Beach Street. Um, as a neighbor who lives on Beach Street, I strongly oppose the request for variances. A building of this size in such a small space would dramatically and negatively affect our
neighborhood. The design and size are simply not consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. I I laughed when I saw that in the proposal. Um, and it will set an expectation of tall managed buildings in what is currently a cozy and quiet neighborhood. Um, I'm especially concerned about the
notification process and the lack of notification. We received the notice of uh being able to oppose this on a Friday and we had until Tuesday at 4 to oppose which was very little time. Um, and I
had come to city hall multiple times asking about the development because I did see papers going up, s for sale signs coming down, everything. And every time I was told there's nothing on file, there's nothing on file. I've been stopping by monthly this whole year and no one could find anything that was
happening there. So then all of a sudden to be two business days was very alarming. Um, I think other folks here are also very concerned about the notifications and how people in the neighborhood can get involved, not just here, but in other developments on our street because we do want to see
responsible construction and and growth and revitalization of our neighborhoods, but not with two business days turn around for us to actually participate. Um, I am also especially concerned about the idea of 31 or more new neighbors not being legally allowed to park their car
on nearby streets because we all know if they can't park legally, they're just going to park illegally. Um, the it's already impossible to park on weekends with the churchgoers and on weekdays with people dropping their kids off from school who are currently parking in the
7-Eleven lot to drop their kids off. Actually, the city of Ravier is currently parking in that lot. The parks and wreck vehicle is parked there right now and has been for most days since the building closed. They don't even want to park on the street. And when people do park on the street illegally, they're
not ticketed. They're not towed even when they're blocking the intersection. And I know because I often call in violations because I'm worried about my neighbors getting hit by cars because people can't see them on the crosswalks or because the fire hydrants are blocked. Um I am an elder millennial and
we do own cars. Everyone in the neighborhood does. If you walk around, you can see they all have two or more cars in the driveway for the most part. And we have to because the sidewalks to the tea are not shoveled. The MBTA buses are not reliable. It we are a car community whether we like it or not. I
would challenge if anyone here arrived here via only public transit today. Um and I think we're just setting up a system that's unsustainable. Um these restrictions were put in place for a reason. And I just have one question. You're not within the party of interest.
So you didn't I am. I'm at 176 Beach Street. You You wouldn't have gotten a notice. I've lived four doors down. 176 Beach. Yeah. I'm marrying him in 45 days. Did you put it? But I'm I'm going to butter
our renters, not voters and residents because these people are all gonna be renters. It's only 2,00. It's only 200. It's a buddas. 300 ft. So, I don't know how you got on notice. Well, I'm glad we did because I feel
like we This is my neighborhood. I walk past it about 50 times a week on my daily walk. So, no, that's good. I don't know how it wasn't a notice. We're on the list of a butters. 176 beach is on the list of abutters. All righty. That were provided in the back of the packet.
I'm just not listed on there because I'm a renter. All right. Um I appreciate that. Yeah. But bottom line, this project is too big for this space. It does not fit in with the community and these variances that the city put in place are there for a reason and should
stand. Thank you. Thank you. That's a good one. Hi. Hi. Name and address for the record, please. is Mary Jane Bruno and I'm at 32 Library Street. This is the notice that she received. Myself and one of my neighbors
made this notice out and passed it 200 notices about this. Okay. It wasn't from the city. I'm saying we didn't. They don't mail it out. No, it's very good. But they don't mail it out. It wasn't mailed out from us. Receive it from the city. You received it from the city. just notice from the city from the
clerk. I'm sorry. All right. Okay. This was something that I personally did with somebody else in the neighborhood so people would be aware because I never saw anything in the review journal about this meeting and I actually went down there and asked them
for a copy of it and she could not provide that because she couldn't find it. and I don't go on Facebook that often. So that was why I'm sure that people didn't know about the previous meeting where only two people showed up.
But so I made this notice out and passed it out. Thank you. With somebody else. So first of all, I feel like a building like that does not fit in this neighborhood. This is a real residential neighborhood. We have the school, the
church, the park. Nobody wants a building like that. That building's going to be, if they do 31 units, 4 feet higher than the the three-story building. That's that's a a a threestory dwelling. That's one place behind where
the building is going to be put. It doesn't belong there. It's going to look terrible. It's not even going to fit in with the neighborhood. And it was my I was told that all those people going to have to sign that they're not going to have a car. That's ridiculous. You can register your
car. I went to the parking department and asked them, you can register that car anyways. Well, you can't park overnight. Go across the street and church in the church. Park in the church parking lot. Who's going to police that? Nobody. So, they are going to they are
going to have cars. You can't tell me anything different from there. And um the other thing is are these tenants going to be vetted for criminal activity or whatever because they're 500 ft from the school that's diagonally across.
You're bringing up good points, but it has nothing to do with the board of appeals. But that's a good point that you can bring to your meeting when they have a meeting. Well, that's all I have to say. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Chair, uh Ed Terrell, 70 Soul Street,
RMS. Some of you know me, some of you don't. I um run the blog Rev Scanner, which is now RS. I get up to 4 million views in a month, and I can tell you that this is the wrong project for this area. This is
my neighborhood. Now, every time the public comes up here and asks for something reasonable, developers come to us and make threats. It's not very nice. So, you know, if people want to
play hard ball, we can play hard ball. Okay? We can remove every single one of you from your seats. If you do not represent the community and the neighborhood, you will be gone. To the city council, we can vote
you out. It is an election year. Many of them, my friends, but enough is enough is enough. Mara Healey is going to be up for a re-election. She can go, too. We are at a breaking point in this
city. People can barely afford groceries and we are asking for some help. Partnerships and we are not getting it. Now you can understand the frustration in my voice because I hear their voices and I'm just telling you
what I hear. The key thing is they should be here to speak. That's not happening. I understand that. There's a great So don't go making your subtle threats that we can be out of here and countries can be changed. We
You cannot They have to We're not hearing it. I don't know. I just want to make that point to you. I understand that and it's true. There is a degree of apathy in the city, but people are being threatened in the city. I've been threatened.
I reported on an alleged stabbing at the high school and my name was broadcast across the the airways and I was potentially uh they wanted to potentially charge me criminally. Okay, Ed, you have good
points, but that's not part of this. So, what I'm saying is that what I'm trying to say is that city hall is treating us as the enemy. Developers are treating us as the enemy. We are not the enemy. We just want a
reasonable situation. Work with us. That's all we're asking. But to come up here and say a blah blah blah, it's not going to work because we're done. Thank you. Thank you for speaking. Anyone else?
Good evening. Please state your name and address for the record. My name is Marie Allesie and I live at 30 Pleasant Street, which means I'm not in a butter, but I'm in this neighborhood. And maybe the first point I want to make is the fact that I was never notified
officially about this meeting or any other meeting of what was happening down there at that intersection. Um, however, when there is a fall festival, I get flyers. when there is Christmas festival
I get a flyer but I wasn't notified about this and this impacts us directly not for one day but for the rest of our lives here in the city which I hope is going to happen but so the 300 ft or yards or whatever
that is I'm not sure exactly what you said 300 feet as to about 300 it seems to me to be a very small distance and in this case especially since all of us in this area go through that intersection. If you're working or you're going to
Market Basket or you're going to Beachmont Station or any place else, you go through that intersection several times a day. We have a lot of one-way streets here. So, you have to follow down there to that intersection. And there are times when it is extremely
busy, which is my second point. Right down there, we have a church. We have a playground. We have a K through8 school, actually early childhood through 8 school. We have the youth center. There's the library. There are two more churches in that area. So, we have an
extremely busy area. Okay. I'm not trying to cut you short, but you speak to your opposition. There's other people that want to speak. Okay, that's fine. Thank you. So my point is we already experience density here, huge amounts of
density at specific times especially and we have a lot of traffic going through that particular intersection. I don't think a 31 unit building is appropriate at all in that place. I would much rather and I'm sure other people would
much rather get together and talk about things that we would like to see there instead of the 31 unit building. Okay. Thank you. Okay, Bob, let's see. 30 Pleasant Street, right across the street from this. Uh, I've heard a lot
tonight. One thing that has not been brought up. I understand that no cars would be causing a problem in this particular area. The residents will not have cars. I understand. I hope it's correct.
However, no one has brought up the point that these residents will have friends and of course friends will visit. If they visit on weekends, all chaos will be in the city. No one will be able
to work around it. So, I suggest this be this request be denied. Thank you. Any other opponents? sing and hear none outside of the hearing. What is the will of the members? I had a question. The young lady,
she made very good points on the change of land on the deed. Um I think that's something maybe you guys can get together and get together with Frank Stringy in the city attorney because that's um that's something beyond our control. Yeah. Even
if they sell the land that follows the deed. So, okay, we if you're going to speak, you have to come up to the microphone. But yeah, even if these uh own current owners now sell the land, that follows the deed forever. That is in the deed forever. So, uh you know,
that basically tells us that they don't ever plan to put any convenience there for the community ever again. We are running out of commercial space in the city. So that takes away the opportunity for small businesses, future
entrepreneurs that want to come into our cities. We already heard from the attorney. He turned away medical. I'm not trying to cut, but you know, this is just that would be a sight plan review. But the purpose is here. If you guys take this withdrawal today, we can't
talk about this piece of property in the deed. Again, that's why I'm asking you to deny the withdrawal and keep this hair. You most definitely Sure you could. Sure, you could. No, no, no. But if you allow this, if you if you accept the withdrawal, then they can come in with a
new proposal and the same restrictive covenant will apply. This restrictive covenant may have been added to the deed unlawfully because it circumvented. But you brought that to the attention so
that it should have happened within due process between the building inspector site plan review should have been flagged, brought to your attention, and it should have never gotten to this point in the first place. So, there's a
lack of oversight over this process in general, including the fact that there's a hazardous substances clause that was added to this property. There's has yet to date been a report, environmental report seen by anyone. So there's
another reason why this should be not withdrawn because we should see an environmental report as well before any you're asking these questions that could be part of a new packet if they were to come in here. They'd have to answer those questions. No, no, no. But the problem you brought it to our attention.
It's not going to die now. Right. But a proposal a new future proposal should not be brought until these questions are answered. Well, it has to go through site plan again. Then that's going to be it will have to go through site plan. So if you bring that to the attention of site plan, it's going to have to be What
I would like to hear from you today then is that you know I I worked for the city of River for 8 years. One of the things I constantly heard was checks and balances. This shows to me that there was a breakdown in that process
somewhere. The other, you know, the other thing is that the regurgitation of financial hardship by, you know, Mr. Damro, they all say that. So that's which is becomes a strategy if that's what your statement if you all if you
all do we take that into consideration it's up to us what we take into consideration right and I respectfully ask you do not have to take what's in consideration by what they present right but variances are being passed through considering financial hardship am I
wrong very I don't remember any I've been here five years there was one on on River Street quite recently that used the exact same language, but that wasn't that wasn't they didn't ask for many. They could have asked for that, but
that's not the consideration. There's many other things in that packet. Okay. Yes. But I'm just want to make sure that when these processes are going through, especially in this case where
our zoning codes are being circumvented by language that is being placed in a deed that is o overriding our public interest and your authority. Really, it's not our authority, but I'm not going to get into a dissertation. It's
the site plan review, the building inspector, but right, they should have flag your points have been raised. I just hope that these are resolved before they So basically what I'm saying is this this restrictive covenant should be
legally reviewed because there should not be a residential property put here per our zoning code. It should only be a commercial property that provides convenience to the neighborhood per per neighborhood business zoning ordinance
that we have. Okay. You brought your point across greatly and I'm I'm worried that if this hearing gets closed that the propo the new proposal is again going to circumvent our zoning laws.
Thank you. We already have a a it's already been asked of the council. What is the will of the council? There's a motion to withdraw withoutice. So, so they're good points brought up and I' I'd be happy to address them. The
the it's important to note that apartment housing use is allowed by is allowed in this district. So this is not a commercial district. Apartment house use is allowed. Is it mixed use? Jerry, I don't want to get into a dis. No, no, but I just want to say what the law is.
It's a it's an allowed use. It is allowed use. Our first set of plans had a small variety store on the first floor. We were willing to challenge the easement for the neighbors. That first meeting, the two neighbors that came said they didn't want a variety store because of the
traffic it brings. And so because of the traffic that it brings, and it does, a 7-Eleven or a uh a sub shop or any other kind of variety store will bring more traffic than these small units. They wanted the variety store gone. That
being said, if neighbors want it there and they want someone to challenge it, we had offered to do that the first time around and it's something we can talk about. We're happy. So if there are strict covenant exist, all right, we're not going to get back and forth there. If you're going to have a public meeting with, if there's going to be a meeting,
you can do that with the So, we'd be happy to hear that if you want to that. The second issue about the contamination, the great thing about redevelopment in the city of River is that you cannot redevelop contaminated property and that's done at site plan
review. It's done after the approval. So, what happens is the soil is tested and if it comes back dirty, it has to be cleaned as a matter of law. You just saw that on Broadway. at the old Bruno Funeral Home. That used to be a gas station, right? 50 years ago. I didn't
even remember it as a gas station. Well, they left two underground tanks full of fuel that had been leaking into the ground for the last 50 years, and no one knew about it. It was contaminating all the water of all the homes around it. And it wasn't until the new developer
who came in, built it, tested the soil, found that the soil was filthy dirty, and then cleaned it, remediated it. So if it if that new project hadn't gone, you'd still have dirty soil leaking oil into the ground. So that kind of uh
language in the easement is pretty standard. Anytime it goes from any kind of retail use to commercial use, the old owner wants to be uh absolved any of any liability. But it doesn't relieve the new owner of doing a uh an environmental
study which would have to be done here. And if the environmental study cames back comes back dirty, it has to be cleaned. No bank, no one is lending money on a dirty property site. And soon as the test comes back negative, then the city would want it clean. That's supposed to be done before varian. No,
no, it's done. That ends it. Is there a motion on the floor? Okay, let's the motion on the floor. But again, if I could, we want to work with the neighborhood. We're happy. We hope people come to this next meeting. Was there not enough notice? Did people not
know about it? Was a busy time of year? We don't know. We want people to come. We want to work with people. We want to hear what you're saying. I think one thing was said something will be built there. So, it's it's getting of what can be built there that works for everybody. Nothing will be perfect, but we want to
work with the neighbors. We really do. Thank you. Motion on the floor to withdraw without prejudice. Could we have a roll call, please? Shall the zoning board of appeals allow the appellant to withdraw the application without prejudice? Mr. Lemonina? Yes. Yes. Mr. Lopes? Yes. Mr.
O'Brien? Yes. Yes. Mr. Pelton? Yes. Yes. And Chairman Tucker? Yes. Yes. The application has been withdrawn without prejudice. No further business. Our next meeting will be March May 28th at 5:00 p.m. Thank you
and good night.