Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting - November 13, 2025

Good evening and welcome to the zoning board of appeals meeting of November 13th. Uh at this time I'm going to call upon everyone so we can stand and pledge allegiance to 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.

I'd ask that you all remain standing for a moment of silence in honor of our soldiers past and present.

Thank you.

I'd like to announce that the next board of appeals hearing is Thursday, December 4th at 5:00 PM here at Town Hall in room 304.

I'd also like to announce that this meeting is being recorded by Damoth Community Media.

Moving on to uh the public hearings portion of tonight's meeting. The first matter that we have scheduled is use variant ZAV-25-11.

The petitioner is Anthony Malikica or Malikica.

The owner is Font 411 Fon Connor Road LLC.

The subject and that's also the subject property is 411 Fonts Connor Road here in town. Also known as map 63, lot 12. The property is located in the office industrial district and this petition was legally advertised on October 23rd and October 30th.

Uh I make a motion that we wave the reading of the abs. I second that motion.

All in favor?

I I The eyes have it.

There's anyone in the audience or any of our viewers at home that would like to see the abundance list? It's on file with the zoning board of appeals office.

The petitioner in this case is seeking a use variance to construct a fueling station with a convenience store and food service drive-thru in an office industrial zone.

The proposed fuel station with convenience store is not an allowed use per article 22 section 375-22-2 allowed uses and will require a use variance per article 43 section 375-43.3.

All right. So that's pretty much putting forth what the requests are for a use variance. Gentlemen, moving on to a denial letter from the building department. This letter was addressed to Jeffrey Couture in Marshfield, Mass. It's regarding 411 Fonts Corner Road. It says that I have reviewed your application. At this time, your proposal cannot be approved due to non-compliance with current zoning

regulations. Applicant proposing to build a fuel st a fueling station with convenience store and food service drive-thru in an office industrial zone.

The proposed fueling station with convenience store is not an allow is not an allowed use per 375-22.2 allowed uses and we require use variance per 375-43.3.

Your application is being denied under the following section of the Dartmouth zoning bylaw. 375-4.3 use variances amended and approved on 910 2014 except as expressly prohibited in this bylaw variances may be granted for uses of land not allowed by right provided that in accordance with the provisions of Mass General Law 40A section 10 and amendments or supplements there too the board of appeals

determines that such land or structures cannot reasonably used as allowed by the zoning bylaw except that the board of appeals shall not grant varian es for uses of land in the single residence A, single residence B, and C districts and it's dated September 4th, 2025.

We've also got some comments from other departments in town. The planning department's comment is that site plan review by the planning board will be required for this project, as I'm sure the applicant is well aware. Uh board of health says please be advised that the board of health plan has their own plan review via the viewpoint portal. You will need to complete this at the time at the same time as you apply for a

building permit.

Uh in addition, it indicates that there was going to require they're going to require a report from a certified asbestous inspector who has conducted a pre-demolition inspection of the presence of suspected asbestous materials. Two, proper documentation by a certified licensed Asbestous contractor that the asbestous materials was properly removed and disposed. An air quality report if ACM were found and removed.

A BWP AAQ6 construction demolition notification.

Conservation says no direct conservation issues here, but as a commercial development. However, the conservation commission will be interested in the project's compliance with the requirements of the Dartmouth storm water bylaw and regulations as administered by DPW relative to storm water quality treatments and discharges where applicable to conservation commission jurisdiction. And DPW

indicates that it is recommended that all existing and proposed utilities be shown on the site plan for review. The attached site plan does not show any existing or proposed utilities.

All right.

Is there anything else that we need to read into the record that you're aware of?

All right. So, there not being probably any questions at this time. I'm going to call upon the petitioner. I can see the representatives is here. Attorney Babrowski. The floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. For the record, Mark Babrowski. My office is in conquered, Massachusetts, and I represent your applicant. The uh original applicant was South Coast LL South Coast Development LLC, but I'm told by my client that within the last 10 days or so, they have actually purchased the land and have established a new LLC in order to uh operate. If this project is approved, I believe we

uh the new the new LLC is Font Corner 411 411 Fonts Corner LLC. And I've provided Michelle with a certificate of good standing um which my associate got from the Secretary of State's office.

According to this, it says it was just formed on October 29th. That was just days ago.

Right.

And we also have a copy of the deed.

I have a question. We published in a different name.

We may have.

Oh, we did.

Okay. Well, you published under South Coast, but I think it's a small matter to indicate in any final decision that the permit is granted to South Coast or its nominee or designate. That would take care of the problem.

All right.

Yeah, I'm fine with that.

All right. often times these things if approved flip and the No, but I would think that you'd have to make the change after the approval because everybody's been given notice that the entity is South Coast, not 411 Fonts Road.

It is that is the case. But if the permit is issued to South Coast, if we approved it and somebody wanted to take an appeal of our decision, I could see them taking an appeal that the wrong entity came forward to present their case.

I'm here as South Coast.

Uhhuh. Okay.

And it's it's the same manager of both LLC's. So the only thing I point I can point out to is the purchase and sales agreement that was submitted at the time says or nominee, right?

So at any point in time up until the day of closing, sometimes it's up to seven days prior to there's no this one doesn't even have that requirement. So right up to the time of closing, they could have uh reassigned the rights as a buyer to another entity or individual that they would like to.

Exactly.

All right. But I understand the concern.

I understand the concern. But I I I feel comfortable.

And as long as you feel comfortable.

Listen, I feel I feel comfortable. The thing is is again, and if there if there is ever an appeal, they're the ones that going to have to bear the burden.

No one's going to have standing to complain that the name of the that the name of the development.

And only that in his letter, he says he's going to defend us. He didn't say it was for free, but he said he would defend us.

Okay.

So, um I did provide you with a memo which is dated November 13th, and I hope that you've seen that. Uh I'll just I'll I'll run through the memo quickly. As uh you indicated, Mr.

Chairman, this property is in the oid.

The subject property contains 18.91 plus or minus acres and um it's a pretty long rectangularly shaped piece of property.

There is a plan submitted with the materials. Um I I'll just cut to the chase pretty quickly here for you. You actually have looked at this property fairly recently. Yes. In o in uh 2024 uh a variance was granted with regard to the property uh for I believe the proposal was the uh Audi dealership a commencement of a of a car sales operation. uh it didn't happen but in the uh decision that you wrote for that

the which is at the bottom of page of one of my memo the subject parcel has an irregular shape it's very long and narrow with an average of 252 ft creating significant restrictions for commercial use there exists a significant slope and change in topography the property is divided by areas of wetlands and poor draining the soil conditions on the property restricts the area in which the property

can be developed and in making the finding on the proposed automobile sales. You indicated that this property met the criteria for the issuance of a variance with regard to section 10 of the statute. So we can I think we can put that in the rearview mirror. Um trying to use my words to make your case huh?

The second case that you've had with regard to this locus uh or or the font's corner area generally is exhibit two and this is a decision of the planning board from 2016. The issue in this case for the planning board was whether or not a convenience store with a gasoline service station could be permitted by special permit. Remember the proposal before you this evening has three components. convenience, gasoline

service station, and uh a drive-thru restaurant, which is what the commissioner ruled on when he said that we needed a use variance. That was the drive-through restaurant that attracted uh or basically he doesn't he doesn't mention that in his letter, though.

I I think Well, he he says it's to establish a drive-thru. So, did he I thought I read I don't let me take another look at it. I have that back.

So I the the point the only point that this 2016 case makes is that if I were to limit the proposal here to a convenience store and a gasoline service station, I could do it by special permit at the planning board. It's the addition of the uh drive-through restaurant that moves it into the category of a use variance. And uh we're here for the three component, not the two component option.

And the last case that you've had recently on point is exhibit 3. You'll recall that in 2020 I appeared here for Mr. Robert Minen who had an existing uh Dunkin Donuts and he wanted to now add a drive-thru component. Uh the board reviewed the application in the oid.

remember there's only a sit-down restaurant uh allowed uh in the district's regulations. Uh we made the case at that point in time that a sitdown restaurant in a incredibly busy and expanding neighborhood including the Bristol County House of Corrections, the law school, a hospital, the sheriff's office was uh shortsighted at best. And the court agreed that it was uh would promote public good by allowing for more

opportunities for people to have a quick and um and quite common lunch which pick it up, drive it back to the desk and and get on with life from there. Um and that variance led to the operation of the drive-thru um at the uh address of the property permitted in exhibit 3.

So from our perspective, u the same things that we said about the Dunkin Donuts in 2020 apply here 5 years later that the oid is is behind the times in terms of regulations that will promote u appropriate use of the land in the district. The district continues to expand as far as I can see. The uh sit-down restaurant formula is fine if you've u maybe take advantage of it once

a week, but you have to eat lunch all five days. So, the opportunity here to have a franchise uh food provider would be the same as it would be in the other case. And like the other case, I've given you a a thing that's had a GPI on the top. This is from Greenberg Peterson. Uh Heather Montikup, who's a qualified traffic engineer, uh points out that the traffic associated with this new operation is going to be

minimal. Uh in the third paragraph of her first page cover letter, u studies have shown that for developments such as the one proposed, a substantial portion of the site generating vehicle trips are already present in the adjacent roadways. Uh the average pass by trip percentage is 76% during the weekday peak, 75% during the the weekday PM peak hour. And under those circumstances in

the next paragraph, this equates to less than one new vehicle trip per minute along Font's corner during the peak hours, both AM and PM.

I if I might explain what what basically the assumption here by traffic engineers is that anybody stopping in here for service gasoline service uh convenience store purchase or food purchase out the window is going to be on the road anyway. Nobody's making this as a destination trip. They're just on the road. They see the opportunity, they stop. So you can't say that it's going to generate a hundred new trips in a

peak hour or 52 coming in and 52 going out, which are the statistics that she came up with. It's much simpler than that. And we would urge a finding therefore of no detriment with regard to the allowance of the variance in this case.

Um I I spoke with Daniel this past week. I said my my appreciation of the facts here are that we're going to have to come in now with a full sight plan. Uh but you're you're comfortable with the 2016 finding that the board already made on the on the first two components and that what this is I I don't want to have to apply for a special permit. That was the basis

of my call. The is the use variance going to cover all three things. And he said that's the way I read the commissioner's letter. You only will have to get site plan approval from the planning board. I'm told by my client this evening that none of these uh things even if they move around. This is a ripped off of a it's pretty boilerplate, but none of them involve dimensional variances and there will be

no request for a dimensional variance down the road. So, it will meet the dimensional requirements of the office industrial district.

So, I I have a just a quick question at this point. Um, since we already have a Dunkin Donuts right up the street from this where this is being proposed, what would be one of the potential vendors for for the circulating of drive-thru traffic, who would it be in something like this?

Um, what did the drive-thru? What do you mean? I I didn't understand.

Be a donut shop. Would it be a sandwich shop? I just wondering what what it would be so I can get a sense of traction there would be to have a drive-thru.

We're looking looking at coffee.

It' be coffee. All right. So, and remember that as I informed you five years ago, my latest my statistics on Dunkin Donuts are that uh approximately 72% of the revenue comes in through the window.

It's not like it's not coming in the door when people walking in for a cup of coffee. It's coming through the window.

Okay.

All right, gentlemen. Any questions?

Uh, not at this time. If you want to open for public. I have no questions at this time.

Any questions? Attorney Far or Dr.

A guy?

Not at this time.

Not at that point. No.

All right. So, obviously this is a public hearing. Um there's anyone in the audience that would like to come forward and speak either in favor or in opposition to this petition. I like state your name and your address. You need to come to the podium, please.

All right. So, there doesn't appear to be anyone here who's going to speak either in favor or in opposition.

So, I'm to understand based on this plan that there's not going to be any type of uh wetlands really infringement here and there not going to be anything necessary for some significant filings of conservation.

Do you know the answer to that?

Uh, it appears that please state your name and address, please.

My name is Vicky Higgins. I'm the owner of South Coast Development LLC and the owner of N uh 411 Fonts Corner Road LLC.

My office is 280 Air Road, Harvard, Mass.

Um, the the improvements that are shown on the site plan have no encroachment on the wetlands. The wetlands are further to the back to the rear of the property behind the cell phone tower. We we're not gonna we're not developing um that far back.

And you're you're not looking to develop anything uh east of the property beyond what's on this plan.

That's correct.

East of the property.

I was trying to think where east was.

This way.

I got it.

I got it.

It looks like the 100 foot.

I've also noticed here with the fuel station, I noticed that one of the areas is a little bit larger. Is there a reason for that?

Uh, one island, there's five islands under the canopy. Yeah.

Uh, each island has a gasoline dispenser. The one island that's wider would also accommodate diesel. Would sell diesel. That's a diesel for longer vehicles.

Diesel dispenser.

Okay.

All right. So, Haleem, I'm sure you've taken a look at this. Um, anything?

No, Mr. Chair. I, you know, you know, this is probably 80% of my work is drive-thru and gas station. So, uh, it's a very nice layout. Uh, this is much smaller scale than what was presented before with with the Audi. But looking at the site, it's the dimensions are really comfortable.

you know, it's going to be nice uh uh circulation around for fire, for parking. Uh the driveways are nice set apart from each other and I don't see any issues with site and again they will have to go through site plan review with the planning board. But going back to this property, I think we granted at least four or five different use variances in that area back with the phone corner. It was a lot more dense

that that development that was proposed and and in terms of traffic, I agree 100%. You know, I go through this every week. Traffic, I mean, gas stations are not traffic destinations. And people don't drive from town to town looking for a gas station. It's mostly people are working. You know, this is going to be mostly people up to the north going to in the morning to hoton the medicals

and coming back. It might help actually alleviate some of the traffic to the south by Route 6 because people do like same with Dunkin Donuts. I think attorney Babroski made that uh argument last time that people won't have to go down south to buy, you know, the Duncan cross over and then go over, you know.

So, I think it would help. Uh, I don't see any issues with the traffic and I think attorney Babrowski covered all the legal legality for for granting a variance on the use variance and um I think we kind of set that up for him.

I I don't I don't see any issues here.

That's my personal opinion.

How about you, Attorney? Any comments?

I don't I don't have any issues with the project, gentlemen?

Nothing. All right.

So, Mr. Babrowski, at this point in time, um, I'm going to call upon you to put together a proposed decision for us with findings and, uh, the 4A rationale for the four tier for the the fourprong, which I'm sure you're quite familiar with. Um, put together some proposed findings and and a decision. We'll take a look at it and schedule for another date so we can put this uh have a have a formal vote on it.

May I assume you're asking me to prepare an approval with conditions?

Yes, sir.

Thank you.

Is that fair enough?

Yes.

Okay.

U put it on the It's not Would you like another date on this?

When is your next meeting again? I was not paying attention.

As of December 4th, but I think we got how many case? So, we're kind of we've got 40Bs that are if you haven't heard already, I know we're sort of being bombarded by two 40bs that are before us and we're having those matters on six o'clock and we're having the general the local matters on at 5:00.

I I noticed the change in your beginning time.

Yes. And that's why but we're trying to from athan to get here at 5:00. So, you don't have to be here at the next hearing though.

You don't have Zoom, do you?

Uh, no.

Okay. But you you don't have to be here at the next hearing.

The only Well, that's fine. My wife is having u cataract surgery on the third and on the fourth. I don't know. I have to bring her back into Boston.

As as long as somebody here represent

you'll have it in plenty of time to look at, right? And if not, if you need another date, we'll give you the following week.

Worst case scenario, I'll have an associate come down and they'll not know much about the case, but they'll be here to answer any questions.

That'll be fine.

What What else we have at 5:00 on the fourth continue case?

Oh, yeah. The state recuse myself. Yes.

So, the recusal on that. Uh, we'll put this one on first. You're right. I mean, put this one on first. Take five minute, two minutes. Yeah.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So, we need a motion to uh I mean this is uh we we're well be we're well within the the 90 the was it 120 days? Yeah, well within that it's the first time this is on.

Uh so I'll entertain a motion to continue this to December 4th at 5:00 p.m. here at town hall.

You okay? You're okay with that date for now?

Yeah. I make a motion that we continue uh use variance ZAV-25-11 to December 4th at 5 p.m.

Second that motion.

All in favor?

I I the eyes have it.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, members.

All right, moving on.

Moving on to the second matter that's on the agenda for tonight's meeting and it's our last hearing.

It's variance case ZAV2-4 was continued from October 23rd, 2025.

The petitioner applicant is Dion Ketta.

Um the subject property is located at 25 Thatcher Street in Dartmouth. Mr. Ketta Cadeta is also the owner of the property. It's known as lot 91-1 on map 122. It's located in the general residence district. We've already uh waved the reading of the abutters list.

And in this case, the petitioner is seeking a variance to reduce the setbacks from the required 20 ft to zero feet to construct an outdoor deck/kitchen grill area in the rear of the house for the property line. Article 375-10.4D1B 4 D1B development standards. All right.

So, please state your name, your address, and uh explain to us what's transpired since the last time you were here. Uh my name is Dion Kalita. I am the owner of uh 25 Thatcher Street in uh obviously in Dartmouth. Um what has transpired is I I took a photograph.

This uh I was trying to get an engineer out. I didn't get I didn't have luck getting an engineer due to not just the timing, just things going on. Um, but I did take a photograph from the property line to the inside of the the wall and it's roughly it's roughly 16 in back from the property line. Um, I was just trying to see if there was a way to uh accommodate an additional distance compared to

having a having zero, which I know is uh not common. Um, so I mean, I came up with a 16in setback. Beyond that, I honestly short of demoing it and putting pavers, I don't know what else I can do out there.

You guys have the photo?

Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah.

All right.

So, what is actually the thing is is this measurement from what I see in this photograph, it's 16 in from the inside.

From the outside rail, it's roughly 9 and a half inches from what an area looks like possibly from the edge of the fence.

Correct.

So, how you measuring it? 16. 16 to the inside of the of the of the fence/wall where the deck tech where the deck technically starts on the inside of the fence.

Plus, we we're not sure if that if I may miss a chair. I mean, this is not what we rely on. We don't really The fence may not be on the property line. How the fence might be that's why we always ask for plans to actually and I I can provide one. I just have to get that sorted out. But I can provide one at some point.

Okay. Uh, but I don't know how I feel about 16 in, but um, and I don't even know if it's 16, but if even if we were to take the math at 16, I don't know how I feel about that, but I'm only one person.

Um, so is there anyone that would like to speak at this point in time? Any questions of the Yeah, I thought one of the last times you were here, we suggested that you sit down with the uh, cemetery committee or board of directors and talk about a resolution. Did you do that?

No, I did not.

Okay.

Is it Did you make it a choice not to or is it Yes, I did. I chose not to in dialogue.

Well, that puts us in a more precarious position, at least for me anyway. But any comments?

Anything you like to add?

I guess the the other the other thing that I have is that that fence I mean I don't know that it's actually on the cemetery directly on the cemetery property. I know that my neighbor put up a fence and he's 18 the fence is 18 in off my property.

Uh so, uh you're planning on having your engineer, whoever's going to design the the project for you, shoot the line, figure out exactly where it is.

Um if in a if we can if there's a specific dimension that that I can meet to satisfy the requirements of of the uh committee, I can absolutely have an engineer go out there and do that. But if if the answer is going to be I need five feet, then there's no point in me doing that.

Oh, okay.

That's the that's my my train of thought.

I mean to satisfy the the the dimensional setbacks, Mr. Kleta, I think the the setback is 20 ft.

It is.

We know that it is. But I think at one time we talked about maybe trying to compromise because we have we've never granted a zero setback to a project before and you know it's that's what we were struggling with and you know we thought you wanted to go back and and and talk to the neighbors you know or uh not I mean I you know I'm sorry I didn't mean to interrupt. Uh

so and again I mean I would hate to say oh yeah we're good but 16 inches or 8 inches and you go back and you hire somebody and you know I don't think the 8 in is going to cut it. Is it? I mean I don't know. I'm I have a feeling I don't know. I just I always have I always look at some minimum at 4 feet to give people an opportunity to be able

put a ladder on something if they need to get where between two structures.

This is a little bit different. I understand this is unique because it's it's a cemetery and it's not like these, you know, the people that are there are necessarily being impacted. Um I know there was an explanation and I'm going to give the person an opportunity to speak as well if anything's changed, but I I did listen to what they had to say.

Um and this would give an opport Oh, maybe to some shrubs or I think there is some there's a privacy.

If you had four feet, you'd be able to put some shrubs and that way there'd be a buffer there. because we granted that before and we we've uh there is vegetation on the opposite side of the chain link fence the chain link fence or a portion of it because some area it's not as well that's not my property obviously the fence is also belonging to the cemetery that's not my fence the chain

4 foot or buffer or 5 foot buffer you would be able to put some kind of vegetation just uh you know um so to lessen any impact of what your you know whatever activity you may have going on in the deck to to the neighbors.

All right. Um am I to understand that you're looking for some direction as to what we would feel comfortable with so that that way you know either you're going to abandon the requ abandon the request or you're going to actually get the land surveyor to survey it. You're going to cut back the deck and you'll know that I can proceed accordingly. Is that what you're looking for?

That is correct. That is correct.

I'm at four feet. That's where I feel comfortable with something like this.

Whether or not that works for you, I don't know.

Understood.

And I'm only speaking for myself.

I could live with four feet.

All right. So, there's someone else.

Four feet from the property line.

Property line. Where? Wherever that is.

Right. Wherever that is. Right. For all we know.

It may be. I mean, we don't know.

We don't know. So, and maybe the fence may be encroaching and then maybe he has a cause of action against the the trustees of the uh of of the uh cemetery. I don't know. But until we see something put forth with by registered land surveyor with their stamp, then we can rely on that. So, if that's provided you some guidance, it is.

Okay. So, this is a public hearing. Uh I know that there's a person here that they're in opposition to this. they represent to us that they represent the board of trustees. So, we'll give them an opportunity to speak if they something they'd like to add. Is there anything you'd like to add here, Miss M?

One thing that I have not already said before.

Okay.

So, continuence date and continuence date, but it won't be till the 4th. We got to put you on for the 11th or maybe a late a date a little further away.

We're going to do January.

He's going to need time to hire. So the thing is is yeah, he's going to need time, but also there's an amount of time on this. When's it when's the clock?

He's been sent. He's been sent.

Oh, he already sign. He already signed.

Great. Okay. I had already forgotten. I had forgot about that. Great.

So, you think you'll have enough time by the 11th to get somebody to uh to go out there and actually do this?

I will. Yes.

All right. And if you don't, please let us know beforehand. We'll give you a continuence, but you just got to let us know.

Understood.

Okay. At least now I have some kind of a guidance on something to go by and I can make a more educated decision going forward.

Okay.

Um December 11th at 5:00. What do we have on for for the 11th at 5?

B76 corner.

Um the old golf one. Yeah. Who who's the petition on that?

Um it's attorney Williams.

J Oh, yeah. Okay. He represents who?

The Tom Kit's property.

Tom's property. Okay. Um we have one other. So, we could put this one on.

I'll entertain a motion.

Um I make a motion that we continue variance ZAV-25-4 to December 11th at 5:00 p.m.

I second that motion. All in favor?

I.

The eyes have it. See you then.

Thank you.

Moving on to the administrative portion of tonight's meeting.

All right. Happy camper.

Oh, how am I doing here? First thing we have on is review and approval of special permit ZSP25-5, use variance ZAV2-5 and variant ZAV2-9 for Zero State Road.

I have no comments, Mr. Chair.

I have no comments, gentlemen.

Comments.

All right. I make a motion that we approve the minutes for the review and approval of special permit ZSP25-5 use variant ZAV-25-8 and variance ZAV25-90 State Road.

Second that motion.

All in favor?

I I the eyes have it. Next is review and approval of variant ZAV 25-435 Thatcher Street. It was continued from September 10th, 2025.

I have no comments. No comments either.

Pretty straightforward.

I make a motion now. We approve the minutes of the review and approval of varian 25-435 Thatcher Street continued from September 10th 2025.

Second that motion.

All in favor?

I I the eyes have it. And last but not least, reviewing of appro and approval of comprehensive permit ZCMP-25-1 October 23rd, 2025, 970 Tucker Road.

No comments, Mr. Chair.

I have no comments, gentlemen.

I have none.

Neither do I.

Make a motion that we approve the minutes review of approval of minutes of comprehensive permit ZCMP25-1, October 23rd, 2025 for 970 Tucker Road.

Second that motion.

All in favor?

I The eyes have it. Is there any other business that any of the members would like to discuss?

Any old business, new business, gentlemen?

No, no, no, no.

I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn.

I make a motion that we adjourn. Second.

All in favor?

I.

The eyes have it.

Have a nice evening, everyone.