Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge council to deny height variance for proposed Bennett Road assisted‑living facility
Summary
Three residents submitted written comments opposing a three‑story, 120‑bed assisted‑living proposal at Bennett Road and West 130th, citing concerns about height, neighborhood character, stormwater, traffic and strain on EMS; they asked council, the Board of Zoning Appeals and Planning Commission to deny the variance and consider resident input.
Multiple residents submitted written correspondence for the April 21 record urging council and related boards to deny a requested height variance and reconsider the proposed Vermilion Development / Silver Birch Assisted Living project at Bennett Road and West 130th Street.
Mia Cirignano, who said she lives directly across the street from the proposed site, wrote that the three‑story, 120‑bed design would “tower over nearby homes and significantly alter the established character of the neighborhood.” She requested denial of the height variance and said changes presented to the Planning Commission—such as roof‑pitch adjustments and added tree buffers—did not address core concerns.
Other residents echoed public‑safety and infrastructure objections. Erin Edwards and Jessica Fenos said the corridor already experiences congestion and that an institutional facility of that scale would increase ambulance and overnight emergency responses, adding sustained noise and flashing‑light disturbances while further straining EMS. Residents also raised stormwater and drainage concerns, noting local yards already experience water accumulation and asserting additional runoff from a large building footprint and parking area could worsen flooding.
The correspondents requested that council, the Board of Zoning Appeals and the Planning Commission fully consider resident input, that existing zoning protections be enforced, and that a variance not be granted absent clear demonstration of need and hardship appropriate to zoning law. The transcript shows the letters were read into the official record by the clerk but the council did not take a formal vote on the specific zoning request in this session.
No developer response or Board of Zoning Appeals action is recorded in the minutes excerpt provided; the Planning Commission had recently reviewed the project and residents were advised their correspondence would be included in the record.
