►
From YouTube: Zoning Board of Appeal Hearing 10-17-17
Description
Zoning regulates the use and dimensional boundaries of privately owned buildings and land. The Zoning code is in place to protect the neighborhoods from the construction of buildings or structures that do not fit into the context of a neighborhood. The Zoning Board of Appeal hears appeals for varying the application of the Zoning Code and determines when it is appropriate to grant deviations from code restrictions.
A
The
Board
of
Appeal
will
start
just
a
few
minutes
late,
we're
waiting
for
our
newest
member
who's
being
sworn
in
right
now
and
so
give
us
a
couple
of
minutes,
but
just
a
reminder
when
you're
here
to
speak
and
in
support
or
in
opposition
to
a
case.
Please
keep
your
comments
directly
on
the
project
and
if
somebody
else
has
already
stated
your
your
concern
just
put
your
name
and
address
on
the
record.
Okay,
so
give
us
a
couple
minutes
and
we
will
resume
the
we
will
actually
start
the
poll
meaning.
Thank
you.
A
A
So,
just
to
remind
please
make
sure
your
cell
phones
are
off
and
if
you
have
any
conversations,
please
them
take
them
outside
of
the
room.
The
Poohsticks
in
here
are
not
good
again,
in
conformance
with
the
Open
Meeting
Law
I'm,
informing
you
that
this
meeting
is
being
live-streamed
and
will
be
available.
Also
after
this
meeting,
as
I'd
mentioned
before,
when
you're
here
to
speak
in
opposition
or
in
support
of
the
project,
we
take
everybody's
comments
under
advisement.
So
please
keep
your
comments
to
the
point.
B
B
B
B
H
G
G
A
J
B
K
L
M
M
N
Are
here
for
final
arbiter,
madam
chair,
the
531
and
533
East
second
Street,
specifically
531
is
the
building
that
was
approved
a
couple
of
years
ago
and
since
then,
the
the
building
next
door
has
been
approved
and
a
slightly
increased
height
and
that
increased
height
has
created
a
building
code
violation
on
our
building
for
an
excessive
snow
load.
So
we're
seeking
here
is
to
raise
our
height
to
match
the
building
of
533.
N
A
N
You're,
looking
at
here
is
you
can
see
the
dark,
exterior
metal,
cladding
and
an
arch
in
the
window.
That
was
the
previous
roofline
in
the
building
to
the
left
of
it
is
the
also
approved
project
that'll
be
built
together,
which,
with
this
one,
the
the
shaded
area,
that's
about
seven
feet
up,
can
increase
on
531
the
project
before
you
to
match
the
building
to
the
last.
So.
A
N
N
O
M
N
B
Following
an
S
case
on
G
cod
calling
boa
seven,
five,
two
eight
four
six
one:
seventy
three
Endicott
Street
this
is
this
erect
a
four
unit
building
with
four
parking
spaces
which
requires
G
card.
The
violation
is
article
32,
section,
four:
she
caught
applicability
and
the
ground
water
conservation,
overlay,
district
name
and
address
to
the
record.
Please
good.
P
Morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
Daniel
Toscana
from
Drago's
Toscano
LLP
15
garage,
P,
Boston
Mass.
We
represent
the
developer
in
this
matter
of
include
development.
To
my
immediate
right
work
in
a
conjunction
would
turn
the
Pat
Mahoney
on
this
matter
was
seeking
your
support
for
that
because
issue.
This
is
a
full
family,
residential
building,
new
development.
There
not
been
a
positive
170
grand
mccottry.
We
have
met
all
our
looks
like
a
zoning
dimensional
requirements
on
this
particular
site.
The
only
issue
is
in
the
ground
water
overlay
district.
P
Q
R
S
T
Please
good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
Richard
Lin's
1216
Bennington,
Street,
East
Boston,
on
behalf
of
petitioner,
requesting
a
brief
deferral.
This
is
subject
to
article
80.
Arghya
process
is
ongoing.
We
still
require
to
have
our
article
80
meeting,
that's
being
scheduled
by
the
BPD
a
we
expect
that
to
happen
relatively
soon
and
have
this
finalized
with
the
BPD
board.
U
B
Have
a
date
of
November
14th
gives
you
enough
time
or
is
it
not
that's
your
least,
we
can
get
you
in
later.
Wait
up,
December,
12th,
fine,
the
date
of
December
12th
is
11:30
11:30
at
11:30.
Thank
you.
Are
there
any
other
deferrals
or
withdrawals
for
9:30,
barring
them?
We'll
call
the
first
case
calling
VOA
seven
three:
nine:
zero,
nine
nine
401
Bremen
Street.
B
This
is
adding
a
two-storey
of
5,250
square
foot.
Addition
to
the
Excel
Charter
High
School
in
East
Boston.
The
violation
is
article
25,
section:
nine.
The
flood
has
a
district
article
53
section.
37
Raigad
is
insufficient.
An
article
9
section
9,
one
extension:
a
reconstruct
a
non-conforming
used
building,
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
Bob.
V
I'm
sure
I
remember
the
members
of
the
board.
This
is
a
relatively
simple
addition
of
5,000
square
foot.
Addition
on
an
existing
54
thousand
square
foot
high
school
building
that
completed
construction
a
little
over
a
year
ago.
The
addition
was
actually
contemplated
in
the
original
plans,
but
was
taken
out
for
budgetary
purposes.
The
item
fact
the
article
eighty
process
included
it,
but
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals
in
ISD
process
did
not.
This
is
a
two-story
addition
same
height,
no
additional
students,
no
loss
of
parking,
and
it's.
V
The
the
location
is
within
the
flood
hazard
district,
but
the
ground
floor
elevation
is
above
we
dealt
with
this
when
we
built
the
original
building
and
in
fact
we
have
a
memo.
We
can
submit
for
the
record
from
our
civil
engineer,
verifying
that
that
we
will
be
building
our
building
above
the
flood
hazard
level.
X
Y
U
Z
A
L
V
A
A
B
Okay,
this
is
a
change,
occurs
from
a
dry-cleaning
store,
with
accessory
stores
to
dry-cleaning
store
with
accessory
storage
and
six
residential
units.
Renovating
the
upper
existing
three
floors
with
the
new
open
floor,
layouts
reconfigure
stairwells
in
a
rare
addition
to
the
fourth
floor
and
new
roof
deck
violation,
article
53,
section,
12,
the
fluidity
and
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
53,
section
12,
the
height,
is
excessive
article
53
section
12,
the
rear
yard
is
insufficient.
Article
53,
section
12,
the
usable
open
space
is
insufficient.
B
P
A
AA
Chair
the
proposal
is
to
renovate
a
currently
underutilized
building
which
currently
off
you
kids
occupied
by
a
dry
cleaning
with
some
accessory
storage,
and
the
request
is
to
convert
the
upper
levels
to
create
six
residential
dwelling
units.
This
property
by
way
of
reference,
is
literally
across
from
the
tea
stock.
Mr.
AA
Who
many
don't
have
vehicles
most
tenants,
don't
have
vehicles
and
want
to
be
in
the
city
but
find
it
hard
to
find
some
affordable
units
to
make
that
tell
us
about
the
violations,
and
so
the
violations
created
in
trying
to
utilize
the
property
as
it
exists,
creates
floor
area
ratio
violations,
height
violation.
Although
I
don't
believe
that
we're
adding
no.
AA
AB
P
A
AA
A
AC
A
Y
A
AE
AE
There
is
no
address
for
that
property,
except
what
was
deeded
by
an
easement
30
some
odd
years
ago
that
granted
the
dry
cleaner
and
the
dry
cleaner,
only
arrests
to
that
backyard
so
that
he
could
have
trucks
come
in
and
empty
out
of
cleaning
fluids,
etc.
I.
My
question:
we
were
not
aware
of
any
other
meeting
we.
This
was
the
first
we
heard
by
the
city
notice
I'd
like
to
know
what
kind
of
a
business
is
going
in
on
the
first
floor.
Is
that
an
appropriate
question.
A
AA
And
we
appreciate
the
neighbors
here
today
and
expressing
their
concern.
That
was
actually
an
issue
that
was
discussed
with
ISD
early
on
was
the
easement
issue.
It
is
addressed
in
the
plans.
There
has
been
an
easement
provided
it's
actually.
The
real
estate
attorney
is
recording
the
easement
at
the
registry
of
deeds,
as
we
speak
right
now,
but
it
is
reflected
in
those
plans
and
we're
not
we're
currently
going
to
keep
the
first
floor
as
the
dry
cleaning
business.
For
now.
There's
no
change
to
that.
Any.
AA
There
well
I,
can't
speak
to
what
the
former
easement
was.
I
can
tell
you
that
no
easement
was
actually
reported
and
that's
where
we
became
involved
in
discussions
with
ISD.
Previously
there
seems
to
have
been
some
verbal
agreement
about
an
easement.
There
was
actually
no
easily
on
record,
so
we
we're
correcting
that
problem.
P
L
A
B
The
next
case
calling
VOA
six
six
three
seven
zero,
eight
275
Webster
Street.
This
is
a
confirm
occupancy
as
a
three
family
then
changed
the
occupancy
to
a
four
family
by
adding
a
unit
in
the
basement
and
then
adding
a
new
egress
stairs
and
a
deck
violations.
Article
53
section,
eight,
the
use
is
forbidden,
article
53,
section,
nine,
insufficient.
Addition
lot
area
per
unit,
article
53,
section,
nine,
insufficient,
open
space;
article
53,
section,
nine
height
number
of
stories,
I've
ever
been
exceeded.
Article
53,
section
I
on
the
floor
area
ratio
is
excessive.
B
AF
You,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
attorney
Jeff
Drago,
representing
only
Paz
love
the
owner.
My
address
is
15
Broad
Street
with
Drago
and
Toscano,
as
was
mentioned,
we're
here
to
confirm
the
occupancy
of
an
existing
three
family
building
at
275,
Webster
Street
and
changed
the
occupancy
by
adding
a
garden
level
unit
in
the
bottom
level
to
make
it
a
four
family
we're
also
adding
new
decks
and
egress
stairs
in
the
back
of
the
building
and
just
to
point
out,
this
new
unit
will
be
73
percent
above
grade
where
you
can
walk
right
out.
AF
The
back
of
the
building.
This
parcel
owns
this
building
uses
it
as
a
family
building
her
mother
and
sister
live
in
the
building
and
will
continue
to
occupy
this
building
as
well.
The
building
will
have
a
full
sprinkler
system
and
will
actually
be
condo
eyes,
Daz.
Well.
At
the
same
time,
this
particular
zoning
district
is
a
3
f2000
located
in
Jeffries
Point
lot
sizes
2698
square
feet
just
to
go
over
some
of
the
violations,
many
of
which
are
pre-existing.
The
use
is
a
3f
district.
AF
So
this
is
a
four
family
proposed,
the
FAI,
which
was
pre-existing
required
1.0.
We
were
at
one
point
two:
eight
we're
now
at
1.7,
open
space
were
slightly
under
the
300
square
feet
required.
Our
height
was
pre-existing
at
35
feet,
five
inches
additional
lauda
area.
We
have
2698
4,000
required.
There
is
no
existing
parking
there
now
and
none
is
created
just
to
give
you
an
idea
of
the
unit
size.
The
garden
level
is
a
2-bed
2bath,
837
square
foot
proposed
unit.
AF
AF
Y
B
This
is
the
complete
interior
and
exterior
renovation
and
build
a
rare
addition
and
rare
porches
and
build
a
new
additional
third
floor
dwelling
unit
violations,
article
53,
section,
nine,
the
floor:
the
a
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
53,
section
52,
the
roof
structure
restrictions,
article
53,
section,
56,
Osprey
parking
is
insufficient.
Article
53,
section
54
screening
in
Bufferin
article
53,
section
8.
The
use
is
forbidden
in
article
53,
section,
9,
insufficient
side,
yard
setback
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
thank.
AF
You,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
Jeff
Drago,
with
Drago
and
Toscana,
with
an
address
of
15
Broad
Street
representing
Slava
men,
who's,
the
owner
of
43
wards,
word
Street,
we're
here,
seeking
zoning
relief,
1
2
for
a
renovation
project
of
an
existing
2
family,
adding
some
additional
space
in
the
rear
of
the
of
the
building
and
adding
a
third
storey
addition
to
go
from
a
two
family
to
a
three
family.
This
particular
building
has
been
unoccupied
for
a
while.
AF
Some
really
rough
shape
was
abandoned,
as
you
can
see
from
some
of
the
photos
that
I
provided
and
the
rendering
we
are
surrounded
on
the
right
side
and,
as
you
go
up
awards
worth
Street
by
three
family
buildings.
My
client
worked
diligently
with
the
neighbors.
We
have
four
letters
of
support
that
we
submitted.
We
got
both
the
support
of
the
Harborview
community
group,
as
well
as
the
Orion
Heights
Civic
Association,
just
to
go
over
the
building,
just
to
add
again
will
be
fully
sprinklered,
as
required
by
code.
Just
to
go
over.
The
violations.
AF
Use
is
a
violation
going
from
a
two-family
district
to
a
three-hour
FA
are
going
from
point.
8
1.1.1,
3.8
being
required
side
yard
is
pre-existing
seven
feet.
We
have
2.4
and
parking,
there's,
none
provided
existing
and
a
roof
story
structure
restriction
due
to
the
third
level
just
to
go
over
the
size
of
the
unis
ease
of
3-bed
2bath
there
right
now,
existing
3-bed
2bath
they're
smaller
than
what
the
final
product
will
be,
so
these
units
will
become
bigger
and
the
top
floor
will
also
be
a
three-bed
two-bath
unit
as
well.
L
AF
Y
F
B
AH
For
all
McDermott
quilty,
a
miller
at
twenty
eight
State
Street
to
my
right
is
Christopher
Olsen,
whose
manager
of
the
McDonough
family
they've
got
a
family
LLP
with
the
owner
of
this
premises.
What
we
here
for
today
is
the
condominium,
has
510
square
feet
of
space
on
a
guide
and
level
I
referred
to
it
as
got
a
level,
because
the
first
floor
of
this
building
is
raised
is
a
few
steps
down.
It
has
an
eight-foot
ceiling
height
to
the
in
the
lower
level
as
foot
boards
full
windows,
we're
proposing
to
use
that
as
living
space.
AH
We
are
not
changing
the
number
of
bedrooms.
This
is
currently
a
three-bedroom
unit
that
we
will
continue
to
maintain
three-bedroom.
Originally,
it
was
designed
to
have
three
and
a
half
baths.
Some
question
of
issue
raised
the
community
meetings
about
the
need
for
so
many
bathrooms.
We've
redesigned
that
by
making
it
a
two
baths
three-bedroom
unit
and.
AI
Morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
Ford
marina
lands
a
man's
office,
a
neighborhood
services.
We
would
like
to
go
on
record
and
support.
We
hadn't
a
butters
meeting
for
this
project
on
June
27th,
and
they
also
have
the
support
of
the
not
that
waterfront
neighborhood
council.
The
applicant
has
worked
with
the
abutters
in
the
community
to
address
any
concerns,
so
we
can
the
gladly
support
this
today.
Thank
you.
AJ
Q
A
You
is
anybody
here
to
speak
in
opposition.
What
question
comes
learn
the
violation
is
FA
are
what
like
what
is
required
and
what
is
being
proposed.
Well,
it's
it's
a.
AH
A
B
You
next
case
calling
VOA
seven
three
zero
six,
three
three,
forty
nine
Milford
Street.
There
is
a
companion
case
on
building
code
case,
boa
seven,
three:
zero,
six,
three,
four,
twenty
nine,
no
fit
straight.
This
is
to
replace
an
existing
bottom
run
of
a
common
exterior.
Egressed
is
serving
as
the
second
means
of
egress
from
the
street
family
condominium.
B
Building
with
an
exterior
steel
spiral,
staff,
the
violations,
article
64
section,
nine,
be
a
yacht,
isn't
sufficient
article
64,
section,
nine
point:
four
townhouse
row
house
extension
on
the
building
code,
section:
one:
zero,
zero,
nine
point:
one
stay
away
with
white
winder
treads
not
committed
in
a
means
of
egress
name;
an
address
for
the
record.
Please.
A
AK
A
U
A
AK
Affects
only
the
unit
at
the
as
they
suggest
early
as
the
ground
level
on
Milford,
it's
the
garden
level
of
the
rear
of
the
building.
There's
they've
been
complete
deck
of
all
three
floors
presently
in
place
when
he
be
seeking,
he
was
to
just
replace
the
existing
stair
with
one.
That's
a
spiral:
steel
stair
in
the
package
in
front
of
you
a
photo
of
one
two
doors
down
in
the
same
alleyway,
which
was
approved.
AK
With
regard
to
the
zoning
issues,
we
had
a
very
positive
meeting
with
the
eight
streets,
Neighborhood
Association.
They
suggest
that
they
will
be
sending
in
a
letter
of
non
opposition.
I,
don't
know
whether
you've
received
it.
I
did
not
certainly
get
that
if
required.
The
mayor's
office
I
was
present
at
our
meeting,
and
we
had
a
very
successful
mayor's
office
on
butter's
meeting
on
site
as
well,
where
in
the
folks
in
the
neighborhood
and
now
into
the
backyard
reviewed
the
whole
situation
and
work.
A
AL
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members,
aboard
my
name
is
space
Shrieve
mayor's
office.
It
may
put
services
I'd
like
to
go
on
record
and
support
this
project.
We
did,
we
did
hold
on
a
butters
meeting.
They
did
meet
with
the
civic
organization.
They've
also
done
extensive
outreach
with
their
immediate
abutters
I
perceived
at
10
emails
in
support
of
it.
AL
A
B
Case
calling
seven
four
five,
six
one,
seven
three,
sixteen
two
three,
sixteen
a
shammed
Avenue.
This
is
the
change
r3
to
include
an
accessory
retail
package,
store
used
for
a
butcher
shop.
Meat
market,
no
work
to
be
done.
The
violation
is
article
64,
section,
8,
accessory
retail
package
store
is
a
forbidden
use
name
an
address
for
the
record.
Please.
AM
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board
attorney
Nix
Azula,
also
from
McDermott
quilty
and
Miller
28
State
Street
Suite
8:02
here
in
Boston
with
me
today,
is
Charlie
Cummings
from
Walden
local
Inc.
They
are
the
appellant
on
the
project,
we're
here
before
the
board,
to
seek
permission
to
change
the
occupancy
of
this
existing
commercial
space
at
the
property
at
316,
shammed
Avenue
to
add
an
accessory
retail
package
store
use
to
the
current
legal
use
in
occupancy.
AM
The
current
occupancy
is
a
three
family
dwelling
on
the
upper
floors
on
the
ground-floor,
a
butcher
shop
in
meat
market
which
is
operate
or
soon
to
be
operated
by
Walden,
local
and
mr.
Cummings.
As
you
can
see,
we
passed
those
just
some
background
detail
on
the
actual
butcher
shop
and
what
we're
looking
for
is
to
change
the
occupancy
to
provide
customers
with
a
limited
take
out
of
beer
and
wine
as
an
accompaniment
to
the
butcher
shops
meeting
food
sales
to
provide
a
fuller
customer
experience.
AM
AM
A
AM
Yes,
so
the
butcher
shop
is
fully
zoning
compliant.
We
are
not
here
for
the
butcher
shop,
it
is
an
allowed
use.
So
we
are
just
here
for
the
alcohol
use,
we're
looking
at
50
to
60
feet
square
feet
only
really
to
a
couple
wine
racks
and
in
a
couple
craft
beers,
two
selections
to
go
with
that
that
meat.
A
AM
Ma'am
we
have
not
gone
to
the
license
gone
to
the
licensing
board,
yet
we
felt
it
was
prudent
to
come
to
the
Zoning
Board.
First
before
we
engage
the
licensing
board
with
any
discussions
on
on
the
actual
license.
I
will
know
we
have
gone
through
an
extensive
community
process
going
back
to
the
spring.
We've
had
numerous
meetings
with
individual
about
errs
and
property
owners,
other
businesses
up
and
down
Xiamen
Avenue
and
in
the
south
end
we've
met
with
Washington
gateway,
Main
Street.
Several
times
we
presented
to
the
Union
Park
Neighborhood
Association
as
well.
AM
L
AM
The
butcher
shop
is
zoning,
there's
no
process
needed
for
that,
that
is,
that
isn't
allowed
use,
so
we've
already
gone
through
ISDN
and
got
a
building
permit
and
occupancy
for
that.
But
we
didn't
want
to
combine
the
occupancy
of
the
butcher
shop
with
the
occupancy
of
the
liquor
portion
because
of
the
timing
of
it.
You
know
they
wanted
to
be
open
prior
to
getting
the
alcohol
liquor.
Zoning
in
place.
AL
J
AL
A
A
U
C
A
B
T
Twelve
sixteen
Bennington
Street
on
behalf
the
petitioner
media
vision
incorporated
with
me,
is
Jonathan
Sarah,
president
of
media
vision
chair.
This
is
a
proposal
to
construct
a
single
sided.
Illuminated
roof-mounted
static,
billboard
structure
on
the
roof
at
51:59,
Stewart
Street.
This
would
be
a
one
sided
board
and,
as
this
board
I'm
sure
is
well
aware,
this
is
the
first
step
in
a
prerequisite
for
any
permitting
or
licensing
that
could
occur
at
the
state
level.
T
This
is
a
two-step
process
that
requires
a
permit
to
be
issued
also
by
the
office
of
outdoor
advertising,
which
is
part
of
the
Department
of
Transportation
in
reviewing
the
site.
We
are
confident
and
certainly
have
vetted
this
with
the
officer
at
our
advertising,
that,
in
light
of
other
billboard
structures
that
have
been
approved
in
that
area,
this
would
be
in
compliance
with
state
regulations
and
not
interfere
with
any
of
the
spacing
requirements
that
are
required.
This
size
would
be
consistent
with
and
not
in
excess
of
an
adjoining
property
easement.
T
The
Avalon
tower
that's
newly
constructed
has
a
view
easement
across
the
roof
of
this
site.
We've
designed
the
Billboard
to
ensure
that
we
do
not
interfere
with
any
of
those
sight
lines
to
the
extent
that
this
does
appear
to
block
any
of
the
windows
on
that
building.
We
understand
that,
though,
that
area
of
the
building
is
limited
to
a
garage
in
areas
that
do
not
have
habitable
space.
We
did
have
an
opportunity
to
present
this
to
the
abutters
and
had
a
butters
meeting
I
believe
the
mayor's
office.
T
Neighborhood
service
can
speak
on
that
a
little
bit
more.
However,
I
would
add
a
couple
of
things.
First,
this
billboard
does
not
meet
this.
The
typical
size
of
a
14
by
48,
which
is
normally
the
size
of
billboards
that
you
would
see
construct,
is
actually
little
bit
smaller
and
again.
One
of
the
reasons
to
do
that
is
to
ensure
compliance
with
that
view,
Corridor
view
easement
for
the
adjoining
property
owner.
In
addition,
the
petitioners
had
an
opportunity
to
address
what
seems
to
be
always.
T
A
T
The
dimensions
the
Billboard
manage
here
are
ten
and
a
half
feet
by
36
feet,
as
I
mentioned,
that
is
smaller
than
the
typical
billboards
that
are
proposed.
They
will
be
illumination
as
indicated.
This
is
only
one
side,
so
only
one
face
of
the
billboard
is
actually
facing
out
to
Stewart,
Street
and
I've,
provided
here
copy
of
the
plans
showing
the
location
on
the
roof
as
to
where
it'd
be
located
and
a
best
attempt
at
a
rendering
as
the
power
face.
It's
true,
it
is
not
digital.
This
is
static.
AN
U
A
A
T
One
of
the
reasons
as
part
of
the
planning
with
any
billboard
is
to
determine
whether
or
not
you
can
have
state
compliance
with
respect
to
the
proposed
separations
and
our
position
is
this
does
comply
and
we
look
at
that
diligently
to
ensure
that
we
would
not
be
interfering.
I
guess,
with
a
spacing
requirement
that
state
law
or
federal
law
requirement.
D
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
any
change
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood
Services
would
like
to
go
on
record
and
support.
We
held
our
butters
meeting
on
October
5th.
It
was
attended
by
a
couple
of
butter.
Is
one
a
tenant
who
have
questions
about
construction
concerns
which
the
applicant
address,
in
other
words
Chinatown
Business
Association,
and
they
were
our
recommend
support.
So
once
again,
we
were
liked
about.
AG
AO
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
Mary
Higgins
I'm,
representing
the
Midtown
Park
Plaza,
Neighborhood,
Association
and
I
just
want
to
go
on
record
that
there
was
no
outreach
to
this
Neighborhood
Association
regarding
this
proposed
rooftop.
Billboard
I
also
want
to
clarify
that
I
did
speak
with
the
applicant
Jonathan
Sarah.
Yesterday
we
had
a
great
conversation,
but
again
there
was
no
reach
out
to
the
Neighborhood
Association,
which
would
have
loved
to
have
had
a
presentation
regarding
this
before
today's
hearing.
Thank
you.
T
In
communication
with
the
mayor's
office
David
services,
we
rely
on
that
organization
that
construct
us
which
organizations
to
present
to.
We
believe
the
abutters
meeting
satisfy
the
community
process,
we're
happy
to
have
further
dialog
and
communications
with
that
organization.
If
this
is
to
be
approved,.
A
T
B
AP
Good
morning
my
name
is
Michael
Fallon
I'm,
representing
TFC
30,
winter
LLC
and
rhabdo
Savio.
As
architect.
We
are
here
at
30.
Winter
Street
is
an
office
building
on
Winter
Street.
That
is
a
1970s
construction.
The
streetscape
has
several
cutouts
that
are
dark
and
not
enlivening
the
street
life.
What
we've
worked
with
the
community
to
discuss
has
been
how
to
create
a
street
life
that
is
more
in
keeping
with
what's
going
on
in
Downtown,
Crossing
and
Midtown
cultural
district.
AP
AP
We
don't
anticipate
doing
that
right
away,
but
we
would
like
to
put
in
that
structural
component,
if
so
needed
the
streetscape
we've
spoken
with
bid
and
many
other
groups
gotten
there
their
input
and
we've
over
about
a
year
of
this
process.
We
think
that
we
put
together
a
plan
that
adding
to
the
environment
and
creating
a
better
public
access
way
down
through
into.
AP
Currently
in
the
retail
space
is
sent
in
their
bank
and
we
would
love
to
keep
them
as
a
tenant,
but
we
would
look
to
subdivide
that
space
make
it
no
not
sub
divide
but
split
that
space
and
have
a
ideally
a
restaurant
user.
We
look
to
put
in
outdoor
seating
bike
racks
things
like
that
outdoor
landscaping.
The
idea
is
to
lot
in
live
in
this
space
feedback
from
tenants
and
such.
S
AP
AP
AO
AQ
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members
aboard
Doug
Meyer
of
the
downtown
Boston
Business
Improvement
District,
as
the
opponent
mr.
Fallon
alluded
to
earlier.
We've
been
meeting
extensively
with
the
proponent
in
his
team
over
about
this
proposal.
For
some
time
we
very
much
look
forward
to
it.
We
filed
our
support
letter
in
advance
and
send
it
up
to
all
guys
already,
but
in
case
you
got
misplaced
I'm
bringing
up
to
you
again.
Thank
you.
Well,
obviously,
we're
very
much
the
support
course
very
excited
for
it
to
happen.
A
B
AS
Morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board
names
Chris,
Haley
justice,
819,
D,
Street,
South,
Boston,
so
proposing
a
600
square
foot
unit
in
the
basement.
Just
you
know,
as
a
plan
show,
the
current
bar
ratio
of
the
building
is
0.55
and
this
addition
would
great
2.79
this
last
st.
Patrick's
Day
we've
walked
12
cars
at
the
property.
So
we
want
the
space
because
my
wife
mind
just
had
a
baby
we're
planning
on
having
a
second
and
we
thought.
AS
Introduction
of
the
baby
was
gonna,
be
the
most
challenging
thing
in
our
life
and
it's
actually
introduction
of
our
in-laws
to
the
sell
5.
This
property
used
to
be
a
2
family.
It
has
plenty
of
parking
plenty
of
open
space
meets
all
the
other
requirements.
It's
just
that
it's
in
the
basement.
It
is
currently
a
finished
space
down
there.
There
are
seven
plus
foot
ceilings.
A
AT
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board
John
Allison
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services.
This
is
within
article
68,
so
we
have
taken
a
position
of
not
supporting
any
variances
there.
However,
we
did
have
an
abutters
meeting
at
which
no
objections
were
raised.
Typically,
the
issue
with
these
projects
is
parking
and
the
applicant
does
have
ample
off
street
parking
for
both
units.
Thank
you.
A
B
Boa
seven:
five:
five:
seven
zero,
seven,
thirty
sleeper
Street.
This
is
a
constructing
new
pile,
supported,
single-story
Boston
Children's
Museum
parking
garage
at
twenty
eight.
Thirty
six
sleeper
Street
a
park
will
be
installed
above
construction
to
be
completely
constructed
on
Crete,
bearing
of
14
inch
by
14
inch
precast
file,
the
total
site
is
8023
square
feet
and
the
building
is
taking
four
thousand
seven
hundred
and
forty
square
feet.
Violations
Article,
II,
Section,
seven
accessory
garage
is
restricted
parking
zone.
B
AU
Morning,
my
name
is
Chris
cook
I'm.
The
parks
Commissioner
for
the
city
of
Boston,
my
home
address
is
that
what
you
want?
Maybe
an
address
31
den
Street
West
Roxbury
Massachusetts.
Thank
you
I'm
here
speaking
on
behalf
of
and
I'm
also
joined
by,
the
project
manager
from
McKay
construction,
Kyle,
anudo,
Michael,
LeBlanc
and
Amin
Abbas
EDA
from
util
design,
as
well
as
the
hard-working
project
manager,
Loren
Bryant
from
Boston,
Parks
and
Recreation,
under
the
leadership
of
Mayor
Martin,
J
Walsh,
and
in
partnership
with
the
Boston
Children's
Museum
and
the
Martin
Richard
foundation.
AU
Also
the
Commonwealth
of
Massachusetts.
We
are
now
able
to
construct
an
innovative
all
access
park
in
the
spirit
in
memory
of
Martin
Richard,
who
was
the
youngest
victim
of
the
Marathon
bombings.
This
will
be
a
space
which
is
open
to
all
children,
their
families
of
all
abilities
so
that
they
make
break
boundaries
as
they
play
together,
but
portion
of
the
project
above
the
garage
structure
constitutes
10%
of
our
park.
AU
This
portion
of
the
park
will
be
built
over
the
proposed
garage
parking,
creating
an
innovative
graded
hill
that
will
accommodate
play
structures
as
well
as
be
universal
accessible.
We
need
the
grades
in
order
to
make
a
wheelchair
accessible
in
this
site.
The
museum
will
retain
ownership
of
the
garage
while
providing
long-term
easement
lease
to
the
park
above
that
Park
will
be
article
97
protected.
The
museum
plans
to
use
this
garage.
A
AU
AU
The
museum
plans
to
use
this
garage
for
employee
parking
and
storage
of
maintenance
equipment,
the
Boston,
Parks
and
Recreation
Department
plans
to
use
the
garage
for
parks,
maintenance,
equipment
and
activities,
and
in
fact
our
groundskeeper
will
be
stationed
in
this
garage
in
the
space.
The
garage
structure
will
house
eight
parking
spaces
and
reduces
the
number
of
onsite
parking
spaces
that
currently
exist
at
grade
right
now,
there's
24
parking
spaces
and
we
will
be
reducing
those
parking
spaces
stay
within
the
garage.
AU
The
groundwater
trust
has
approved
the
engineering
for
this,
as
the
article
32
conditional
use
permissions
and
the
project
has
either
received
or
plans
to
secure
all
other
require
permits
and
licenses,
as
well
as
real
estate
fleeces
and
easements.
So
the
martin
richard
park
will
operate
in
perpetuity.
We
are
available
to
answer
any
questions.
The
board
may
have.
A
AU
A
A
AT
AG
A
B
Two
cases
calling
boa
seven:
four
zero,
eight
four
eight,
sixteen
twenty
Columbia
Road
there
is
a
companion
case,
boa
seven,
four:
zero,
eight
four
zero
16
22
to
16
24,
Columbia
Road.
This
is
for
16
20.
This
is
the
curb
cut
for
driveway
at
1620
in
1622
1624
Columbia,
Columbia
Road,
the
owners
of
1622
1624
Evans
have
also
applied
for
a
permit
when
we
store
a
common
driveway
violations.
Article
68,
six
and
thirty-four
side
yard.
Providing
access
of
Austria
parking
cannot
be
less
than
ten
feet
wide.
B
Article
68
section,
a
usable
open
space
is
insufficient
in
article
68,
section
33,
our
street
parking
design,
size
of
access,
drive
and
maneuverability.
Are
you
doing
both
of
these
together?
Yes,
okay.
This
is
for
1622
to
1624,
Columbia
Road.
It's
the
same.
Curb
cut,
16
22
to
24.
The
owners
of
16
20
have
also
applied
the
permit
violation.
The
article
68
section
33
party
parking
design
size
that
access
drive,
maneuverability
article
68,
section
34
side
guide.
Providing
access
to
our
street
parking
cannot
be
less
than
10
feet
wide
and
article
68
section.
AV
We
would
like
to
have
a
drive
way
between
our
between
our
respective
houses.
We
do
have
clearance
of
greater
than
10
feet
between
it.
We
would
like
we
would
like
the
granting
of
a
curb
cut
for
access
to
to
parking
behind
our
houses.
We
each
have
space
for
two
spots
and
we've
agreed
and
recorded
it
at
the
Registry
of
Deeds
this
past
week
in
easement
for
ingress,
egress
and
maneuvering.
A
S
AV
A
AT
AN
AN
B
You
calling
the
next
two
cases
calling
VOA
seven:
two:
zero:
six:
zero
zero.
Four.
Fifty
nine
East
8th
Street.
There
is
a
companion
case,
boa
seven,
two
zero
two
five
one,
four
sixty
one
East
8th
Street.
This
is
for
four
fifty
nine.
This
is
a
complete
renovation
to
an
existing
single-family
attached
dwelling,
install
new
siding
windows
and
exterior
violations.
Article
68,
section,
29,
roof
structure,
restricted
district.
B
This
is
4th
for
61
a
safe,
complete
renovation,
an
existing
family
attached
dwelling,
install
new
siding
windows,
exterior
remove
the
constructing
new
roof
and
a
roof
deck
violation.
Article
68,
section,
8,
side,
yard
setback
is
insufficient.
Article
68,
section,
8,
front
yard
setback
is
insufficient.
An
article
68
section,
29,
roof
structure,
restricted
district
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
after.
N
Chair
the
proposal
includes
a
renovation
of
two
existing
single-family
homes
that
will
remain
single-family
homes
and
the
extent
of
the
zoning
relief
we're
seeking.
If
you
can
see
on
the
existing
on
a
to
the
existing
route,
roofline
is
that
roof
line
where
it's
sloped
is
being
leveled
out
to
a
straight
mansard
side,
and
that
is
our
side,
yard
violation
and
restricted
roof
structure
violation.
N
N
A
N
N
L
N
A
AT
B
J
B
This
is
an
addition
of
a
single
store
story,
multi-purpose
assembly
space,
approximately
3,000
square
feet
and
a
three-story
classroom
extension
over
an
open
parking
of
11,000
800
square
feet
and
renovation
of
the
existing
building
to
accommodate
the
additions.
The
violations
article
65
section
41
aa
street
parking-
is
insufficient.
Article
65,
section
8
school's
conditional
use
article
65,
section
9,
the
floor
area
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
65
6a9,
the
rail
yard,
is
insufficient.
Article
65,
section
9,
the
height
is
excessive
name
an
address
for
the
record.
Please,
yes,.
V
You,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board.
This
is,
in
addition,
a
approximately
14,000
square
foot.
Addition
on
about
a
forty
six
thousand
square
foot
existing
school.
The
school
has
Boston
collegiate
has
been
there
for
about
15
years.
The
property
has
been
used
as
a
school
for
probably
about
a
hundred
years
in
some
form
or
another.
There
will
be
no
additional
students
that
come
along
with
this
addition.
This
is
a
really
correcting
some
deficiencies
in
the
classroom
configurations
and
a
number
of
classrooms
that
they
currently
have
about.
V
Half
of
the
building
is
a
former
convent
which
you
can
might
imagine
is
hard
to
configure
in
the
classroom.
So
this
is
a
correction
of
that.
There
are
really
two
components
of
the
addition:
a
3,000
square
foot,
infill
assembly,
space
single-story.
The
current
building
has
no
assembly
space
at
all,
and
then
there
is
a
three-story
classroom
addition.
It
goes
out
over
an
resisting
parking-lot
to
provide
additional
classrooms,
an
administrative
space,
the
classroom
addition
is
raised
above
the
existing
parking
so
that
we
can
preserve
as
many
parking
spaces
as
possible.
V
Yes,
ma'am
I'm
sure,
there's
a
very
small
adjustment
from
the
submitted
plans
that
we
wanted
to
make
sure
you
were
aware
of
in
discussions
with
our
direct
about
ours
in
a
condo
building
at
246
Boston
Street
we've
made
a
number
of
adjustments
some
before
we
put
in
the
the
the
plans
to
ASD
to
have
less
impact
on
their
view
shed.
One
of
those
adjustments
was
to
move
the
building
about
17
feet
further
away
from
them.
V
Another
was
to
lower
the
building
about
two
feet
so
that
it's
equal
with
their
roof
deck
and
doesn't
interrupt
the
skyline
and
what
you
have
in
your
hands
is
really
just
a
3-foot
8-inch
shortening
of
the
ability.
It
is
a
little
less
impact
on
the
again
on
the
view
shed
and
the
open
air
space
from
that
building.
V
Well,
the
additional
the
existing
non-conforming
parking
for
striped
spaces,
I
believe
it
was
17
spaces
and
our
19
spaces
and
we're
dropping
it
down
to
17.
The
requirement
would
be
in
the
30s
there
about
30
spaces,
so
it's
always
been
that
condition.
Now.
I
should
mention
that
the
school
as
a
practical
matter
parks
closer
to
30
to
40
cars
in
there
on
a
regular
basis
with
sort
of
a
valet
style
blocking
in
part.
That's
they've
been
as
a
practice.
V
V
AT
AZ
Good
morning,
madam
chair
board,
members
for
the
record,
my
name
is
Tammy
Donovan
and
also
for
the
record
I'm
speaking
as
a
parent
of
children
through
Boston
collegiate
and
the
school
is
a
fabulous
school.
The
extension
for
cafeteria
and
an
auditorium
would
be
beneficial
since
the
children
of
sit
in
their
classrooms
for
lunch,
they
don't
get
to
have
a
hot
meal.
The
extra
classroom
davia
was
spread
out.
AZ
A
Z
Boston
Street,
okay,
we're
only
opposed
to
the
addition
in
the
front
due
to
the
loss
of
light
of
the
north-facing
units,
there's
nine
units
in
my
building
and
the
the
loss
of
value
due
to
that
and
lots
of
views.
The
addition
is
taller
than
our
building
so
we'll
also
impact
the
roof
deck
the
common
roof
deck
and
additionally
impact
the
value.
Z
BE
V
The
we've
met
with
the
condo
owners
of
246,
but
Boston
Street,
probably
six,
seven
or
eight
times
and
and
their
concerns
are
legitimate.
This
will
have
an
impact
and,
as
I
briefly
mentioned
before,
throughout
those
conversations,
we've
made
a
number
of
changes.
Again
we
moved
the
building
about
17
feet
further
away,
so
now
it's
30
to
34
feet
away
from
the
building.
So
that's
your
sort
of
light
area.
If
you
will
light
and
air
the
building
actually
has
been
lowered,
so
it
is
not
taller
than
their
building
it's
the
same
level.
V
So
when
they
are
at
their
roof
deck,
they
can
look
right
over
the
entire
building
and
and
maintain
their
view.
In
addition,
we've
been
up
on
the
roof
deck
quite
a
bit,
and
the
skyline
view
is
a
little
to
the
left,
shall
I
say
and
that's
why
we've
moved
the
building
in
a
little
bit
three
or
four
feet
just
so,
even
though
you
could
see
over
the
building
it
has,
it
has
a
greater
view
shed
an
impact
and
I
think.
AL
V
A
U
A
A
Finally,
if
you're
here
to
speak,
either
in
support
or
in
opposition
of
the
project,
we're
here
to
get
new
information,
so
give
us
new
information
when
it's
your
turn
to
speak.
If
somebody
has
already
stated
your
concern,
just
put
your
name
and
address
on
the
record,
so
we
know
who's
who's
here,
either
in
support
and
our
an
opposition.
Okay,
thank
you.
Thank.
A
N
Seeking
a
deferral
at
this
time
that
we
had
a
an
additional
community
meeting
yesterday
evening
and
we
had
some
constructive
feedback
and
we'd
like
to
incorporate
that
into
our
design,
and
we
have
one
more
on-site
meeting
and
that
we
believe
we'll
be
ready
to
come
back.
Our
on-site
meeting
is
tentatively
scheduled
for
the
28th.
BF
A
B
B
BG
BG
A
BG
A
AL
A
E
B
Boa
six:
four:
seven:
four:
nine
zero
90
95
Calumet
Street.
This
is
a
change
of
Archie
from
a
three
family,
drawing
to
a
nine
unit,
residential
dwelling
extension
of
living
space
into
the
basement
construct
a
new
three-story
rare
addition
to
an
existing
three-story
building.
It's
a
complete
interior
renovation
with
new
sprinkler
system,
the
violation
article
59
section,
37
masti
parking
is
insufficient.
59,
section,
7,
multi-family
dwelling
is
forbidden,
article
59,
section,
8,
location
of
maintenance
and
shall
face
the
front
lot
line.
Article
59,
section,
8
a
lot
area
for
additional
dwelling
units.
B
W
A
W
A
A
W
A
S
W
A
W
W
I
A
W
W
W
The
intention
is
it
actually
with
community.
The
community
request
that
we
heard
was
that
there
was
interest
in
trying
to
get
more
families
on
the
Mission
Hill
more
permanent
residence,
so
either
that
will
be
the
interests
there
or
we
will
droop.
We
will
reduce
bedroom
count
overall,
the
developer
how's
it
going
to
do
that
and.
W
The
reason
to
go
to
these
smaller
units
is
they're
more
marketable
to
the
professionals,
to
people
who
are
really
looking
for.
They
don't
a
lot
of
roommates,
but
they
are
looking
to
be
close
to
their
jobs,
and
we
have
a
lot
of
permanent
residents
who
are
interested
in
working
in
the
medical
communities
there
and
universities
there.
Mission
Hill
is
an
attractive
neighborhood
for
those
more
permanent
residents
if
they
were
given
the
right
building
stock.
A
W
Have
we've
had
a
spotty
community
process,
not
for
lack
of
trying
I?
Initially
there
was
Nixon
Peabody
was
retained
for
the
project
working
on
the
nine
unit
building
and
we
transitioned
the
owner
made
the
decision
transition
amount.
We
have
a
very
frugal
Haitian
born
businessman
here,
very,
very
smart
gentleman.
He
just
he
couldn't.
He
didn't
want
to
spend
the
fees
there,
so
we
transitioned
that
out
as
we
as
we
downgraded
the
building
size,
we're
no
longer
going
for
the
addition
any
longer.
W
So
we
went
to
a
six
unit
building
and
that,
quite
frankly,
didn't
we
didn't
get
a
favorable
vote.
We
did
go
and
we
saw
it
votes
there
and
we
just
we
caught
feedback,
so
we
reduced
yet
again
to
a
four
unit.
Building
that
plans
for
the
four
unit
building
were
transmitted
to
both
community
groups
via
email
in
early
June,
and
we
requested
it
was
September
18th,
as
we
had
as
we
had
had
a
change
in
our
ZB
a
hearing
date
to
today
we
sent
those
plans
to
both
community
groups.
S
W
W
M
A
A
BH
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board
to
soccer
with
the
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood
Services,
who
would
like
to
go
on
record
in
opposition.
It
is
true
that
they
have
had
a
very
lengthy
process,
I
think
starting
way
back
in
January,
but
with
this
new
scheme
of
four
there
has
been
a
bit
of
a
contentious
kind
of
following
I
was
present
at
the
community
meeting
where
they
did
present,
or
they
did
give
the
option
to
hear
this
proposal,
and
the
committee
was
already
very
rattled
up
and
decided
that
there
was
no
point
even
hearing
it
through.
BH
BI
BF
B
Violations,
article
65
section,
fifteen
MFR-
is
a
forbidden
article,
65
section,
forty-one
pakka
manoeuvrability
is
insufficient.
The
portion
required
parking
is
tandem.
Article
65
section,
nine
clà udia
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
65
sex
tonight
the
built
building
height,
is
excessive
article
65,
section,
nine,
the
side
yacht
isn't
sufficient,
not
equal
65,
section
I
in
the
rear
yacht
is
insufficient
in
article
65
section,
nine
building
height
is
excessive
by
fee
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
excuse.
A
B
This
is
also
a
companion
case,
I'll
pulling
it
to
the
record
now
boa
seven:
three,
eight
one:
four:
seven
102
to
110
Savin
Hill
Avenue,
this
erecting
new
three-story
commercial
building
were
proposed
use
of
automated
teller
machine,
odd
calorie
public
arts
display
space
studio
arts,
fitness
center,
gymnasium
and
general
office
use
restaurant
takeout,
restaurant
Lodge,
bakery
local
retail
business
and
catering.
The
violation
is
article
65,
section,
15
use
conditionals.
B
Some
of
the
proposed
uses,
our
conditional
article,
65
section
215
Lodge,
take
others
forbidden
in
an
LC
district
article
65,
section
16,
the
FA
are,
is
excessive.
In
the
LC
district
in
article
65,
six
and
six
Reyat
is
insufficient.
Article
65
section
21,
Austria
parking
is
insufficient
in
article
65,
section
8
deposed
proposed
uses
are
forbidden
in
a2,
F
4000
district
article
65,
section
9,
the
FA
are,
is
excessive
for
2
F
4000
district
article
65,
section
9
number
of
stories
is
excessive
for
2002
F
4000
district
article
65,
section
9.
B
BJ
Thank
you.
The
proposal
before
you
is
the
raising
of
one
commercial
building
which
is
located
on
Savin
Hill
Avenue,
along
with
two
contiguous
residential
properties
on
Sidney
Street.
These
three
Lots,
once
the
raising
takes
place,
would
be
combined
and
then
subdivided
to
make
way
for
this
mixed-use
development
of
approximately
10,500
square
feet
of
commercial
space
with
two
parking
spots,
along
with
nine
residential
condominium
units
with
13
parking
spaces.
So.
BJ
It's
a
little
bit
complicated
because
when
they
do
the
combining
of
the
Lots
and
then
subdividing
a
lot,
some
of
the
2f
4,000,
which
is
what
the
Sidney
Street
zoning
is
comes
into
play
with
the
commercial
lot
as
well.
So
they're
expanding
that.
So
the
stated
the
applicable
zoning
for
this
area
is
general
convenience
for
I'm
sure
to
be
local
convenience
for
the
commercial
space
and
also
to
F
4000
for
the
residential
area
there.
BJ
BJ
Okay,
the
proposed
use
is
based
upon
those
responses,
for
the
commercial
space
include
some
which
are
allowed,
that
is
an
ATM
art
gallery,
professional
offices,
bakery
and
local
retail,
some
which
are
conditional
public
art
display
space,
art,
studio,
fitness
center,
gymnasium,
general
offices
and
restaurant,
and
some
which
are
forbidden,
restaurant
large,
take
up.
But
that
would
be
part
of
the
proposal,
and
that
was
part
of
our
application.
We
submitted
ok.
A
AN
A
U
A
BJ
Residential
as
a
stated
it's
to
F,
four
thousand,
the
lot
size
after
the
subdivision
will
be
six
thousand
eight
hundred
and
fifty
three
square
feet.
It
is
going
to
be
nine
residential
units
with
thirteen
parking
spots.
There
is
a
violation
on
the
refusal
letter
and
that
violation
is
to
do
with
maneuverability,
because
two
of
those
faces
are
tandem
spots,
so
those
will
be
contained
inside
the
building
themselves.
The.
BJ
There
are
nine
units
in
total
one
adaptive
one-bedroom
unit,
and
that
is
approximately
770
square
feet.
There
are
six
two
bedrooms:
those
are
approximately
1416
square
feet
and
to
three
bedrooms
and
that's
approximately
one
thousand
eight
hundred
and
sixteen
square
feet.
So
this
is
obviously
based
upon
the
square
footage
of
the
two
properties.
This
was
a
article
82
small
project
application.
It
went
through
that
process.
There
was
an
extensive
community
process.
A
BJ
Allocating
two
spaces
for
the
commercial
unit:
the
zoning
would
be
one
space
per
thousand
square
feet
so,
based
upon
the
ten
thousand
five,
whatever
odds
square
feet
altogether,
would
somewhere
be
around
eleven
spaces.
The
developer
has
worked
that,
even
though
this
is
kind
of
a
unique
situation,
the
project
is
located.
A
BB
To
it,
basically,
we
have
a
verbal
agreement,
we're
working
towards
a
full
agreement
where
the
school
of
the
archdiocese
will
grant
us
access
to
the
parking
lot
nights,
weekends
and
whatever
the
school
is
an
accession.
We
will
provide
maintenance,
snow
removal
improvements
and
it's
it's
an
ongoing
relationship,
but
the
archdiocese
does
want
an
opportunity
to
cancel
it.
That's
some
point:
if
necessary,
we
end
up
selling
the
property
and
they
would
give
us
I
believe
it's
a
one-year
notice.
So
it's
not.
We
would
need
permanent
relief
on
the
parking
for
the
commercial
building.
Yes,.
BK
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members,
the
board,
my
name,
is
David
Cotter
from
the
mayor's
office
at
he
would
services
collective
on
record
and
support
for
this
project.
This
project
has
had
a
lengthy
and
very
well
involved
community
process
and
obviously
went
through
the
BP
das
article
85
process.
It
was
approved
by
the
BPD
a
board,
but
they've
also
held
a
number
of
community
meetings
outside
of
those.
This
project
has
received
full
support
from
everybody.
Who's
participated.
They've
also
had
the
support
of
the
Columbia
700
Civic
Association.
Thank
you.
Now.
AG
Q
S
A
A
B
Filing
an
extreme
case
is
calling
VOA
seven
three,
three,
four
four
to
twenty
four
browning
Avenue.
There
are
two
companion
cases:
boa
733
for
three
826
driving
a
veneer:
a
7
3
3
3
4,
3
128,
browning
Avenue.
This
is
424
browning
Avenue,
just
erected,
3
family
dwelling,
the
violations,
article
60
section,
9,
lauda
areas,
insufficient
article
60
lot
area
for
additional
dwelling
unit
is
insufficient.
Article
60
usable
open
spaces,
insufficient
article
60,
section
I
in
the
front
yard,
is
insufficient.
Article
60,
section
9,
the
side
yard
is
insufficient.
B
BL
A
BM
BL
AN
BL
F
AD
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board
Chauhan
Skeens
district
for
Boston
City
Council
Andre
Campbell's
office.
We
would
like
to
go
on
record
of
support,
although
we
appreciate
the
developer,
of
course,
being
in
close
communication
with
the
community.
We
encourage
that
as
this
project
moves
forward.
Thank
you.
B
You
very
much
next
case
calling
BOA
seven
three,
two
four:
six:
six:
twenty
two:
sixty
nine
and
twelve
twenty,
two
sixty
nine,
a
Dorchester
Avenue
this
is
that
delight
as
live
entertainment
to
an
existing
restaurant
bar
Hockman,
see
the
violation
is
article
65,
section:
fifteen
use
the
restaurant
bar
with
live
entertainment,
it's
forbidden
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
Patrick.
N
In
2269
dorchester
EV,
we
have
low
Mills
tavern,
which
has
been
in
operation
for
two
years
in
their
seat
now,
seeking
to
have
an
entertainment
license
for
live
acoustical
performances.
Two
days
a
week,
I've
submitted
the
plans
that
I
requested
from
zba
mr.
mazzani
I.
Don't
have
handouts,
I
apologize
for
that
and
also.
AM
S
N
U
A
BK
BA
B
The
next
two
cases
of
calling
VOA
seven
one
six,
three
zero,
two
one,
nineteen
upon
said
Avenue
companion
case
boa
seven,
one,
six,
three,
zero,
four
one:
twenty
one
Neponset
Avenue.
This
is
the
one
nineteen
the
pancit
have
proposed
to
erect
a
one
family
with
two-car
garage
attached.
That
gray
of
the
structure
is
also
the
subdivide
blocks
into
two
locks:
one
family
and
two
off
street
parking
spaces
at
121,
two
pancit
out
the
violation
of
sixty
article
69
section.
Nine
lot
with
is
insufficient
article
sixty-nine
section.
Nine
lot.
B
Frontage
is
insufficient
article
sixty-nine
section
nine
side.
Yet
setback
is
insufficient.
Article
sixty-nine
section,
nine,
the
minimum
of
front
yard
setback,
isn't
sufficient.
This
is
for
121.
Two
points
that
have
this
is
for
subdivision
of
existing
law.
Due
to
lots.
This
lot
to
be
a
lot
be
proposing
erect
a
one
family
with
two
are
three
parking
spaces.
The
violation
is
article
69
section.
Nine
minimum
lot
size
requirement
is
insufficient.
Article
69
brought
with
us
insufficient
article
69
log
frontages,
insufficient
article
69.
Forty,
a
ratio
is
excessive.
B
G
A
AN
A
G
G
Zygarde
setbacks
are
ten
feet
and
we
are
meeting
them
at
ten
feet
on
all
the
sides.
With
regard
to
a
community
process,
Mountain
chair,
we
had
on
June,
9th
June
29th
and
met
with
the
Fairmont
Association
and
then
again
on
July
13th.
We
met
hand
in
the
butters
meeting
sponsored
by
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services
and
then
again
in
August.
We
met
with
the
Fairmount
Civic
Association
again,
so
we've
had
three
or
four
meetings
regarding
this.
G
BN
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
Brian
Flynn
with
the
mayor's
office
and
Neighborhood
Services
I,
want
to
go
on
the
record
in
strong
support
of
this
project.
The
applicant
and
the
attorney
worked
very
well
with
the
community.
As
previously
stated,
three
separate
meetings
which
were
adequately
attended
and
community
about
was
did
show
favorable
support
after
they
kept
coming
back
and
working
well
with
them.
So
we
are
possibly.
BO
C
B
AM
Morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board
attorney
mix
Azula
McDermott
quilty
and
Miller
28
State
Street
Suite
8:02
in
Boston.
He
requested
a
deferral
to
this
matter
due
to
we're
still
in
discussions
with
our
main
of
butter
regarding
the
proposed
use
of
the
premises.
So
we'd
like
a
little
bit
more
time
to
do
that.
A
A
AN
U
A
U
B
O
A
B
A
B
There
any
other
deferrals
of
withdrawals
for
11:30
we
discussed
there
and
imma
go
back
to
the
10:30
hearings.
This
is
Bo
a
seven
one,
nine
three
zero
three
four
thirty
five
High
Park
Avenue.
This
is
the
changed,
argue
from
stores
offices,
store,
contractor
equipment,
mechanical
and
storage
and
for
apartments
stores,
the
storage
requirement
and
ten
apartments.
The
violations
Article
67
section
56
insufficient
for
parking
proposed
on
a
lot
name.
An
address
for
the
record
please
morning.
T
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
Richard
Lin's
1216
Bennington,
Street,
East
Boston,
on
behalf
of
the
petitioner
with
me,
as
James
Christopher,
the
architect
for
the
project.
The
proposal
concerns
an
existing
14,000
square
foot
lot,
which
has
a
existing
commercial
and
residential
building
two
stories.
Our
proposal
is
to
do
a
complete
reprogramming
of
that
building
to
add
an
additional
six
residential
units
to
maintain
the
commercial
use.
This
will
obviously
involve
substantial
upgrades
that
a
life
safety
and
the
building
components
itself
with
respect
to
the
additional
residential
units,
the
process
to
date
for
the
community.
T
There
was
a
the
butters
meeting
back
in
August
of
this
year,
in
which
a
number
of
items
were
raised
by
some
of
the
abutters,
including
an
installation
of
a
fence
and
the
removal
of
a
tree
on
the
property,
all
of
which
the
developer
has
no
issue
with
and
will
will
comply
with
the
only
violation
for
this
area,
because
it's
in
the
neighborhood
shopping
district
involves
the
off
street
parking
by
our
calculations
based
upon
the
residential
units.
It's
two
spaces
per
unit,
if
you
credit
out
the
existing
space
for
the
commercial
you're.
T
AR
No
matter
the
building
has
existed
this
way
for
some
years.
It
was
before
the
board
and
has
currently
a
residential
component,
it's
primarily
storage
of
heavy
equipment,
so
the
equipment
is
loaded
in
the
morning
and
an
off-site
and
brought
back
in
in
the
evenings
and
off
and
on
large
jobs.
So
we
don't
anticipate
that
the
operation
of
the
commercial
space
which
is
existing
will
affect
the
residents
above.
AR
The
residues
as
I
said
exist.
There
was
a
mix
of
offices
and
Residential's
approved
prior
to
our
involvement
in
the
project.
The
proposed
now
is
to
turn
all
of
those
second-level
residents
and
offices
into
residence
units,
a
total
of
10
units
that
range
from
237
square
feet
to
283
square
feet
there,
the
nine
one-bedroom
units
and
then
one
two-bedroom
unit,
which
is
a
total
of
500
square.
A
L
L
L
BR
A
L
AR
S
S
AR
The
residential
units,
and
if
it's
as
far
as
studio,
one
bedrooms,
I,
think
the
Ono
be
found
what
to
having
them
as
studios.
If
we
realized
the
impact
of
the
small
square
footage,
but
the
the
space
exists
as
it
is,
the
commercial
office
space
is
underutilized
and
I
think
he
has
had
success
renting
the
residential
pieces.
So
we.
U
L
B
S
S
AR
Twelve
spaces:
we
assume
that
the
based
on
my
calculations
we'd
need
25.
If
you
look
at
the
site
plan,
you'll
see
that
there's
a
right-of-way
that
is
currently
closed
off
and
not
used
which
accommodates
additional
parking.
However,
for
zoning
purposes,
we
can't
include
that
include
that
in
our
talent.
Well,.
A
A
U
I
U
AN
S
Is
there
any
attempt
to
do
architecture
at
all?
To
this
you
know,
I'm,
taking
a
look
at
the
building
and
all
you're
doing
is
filling
in
dwelling
units
into
an
industrial
building.
That's
your
building
that
I
don't
know
when
we
approve
that
or
if
we
ever
forward
but
I'm
having
a
hard
time.
Thinking
that,
under
this
board
at.
S
L
AR
BS
S
A
B
The
next
case
calling
VOA
seven
three
zero:
seven
one:
six
one
77
Glen
Ellyn
road
impossible
with
4,300
square
feet,
directly:
new
construction,
single-family
dwelling
the
violations,
article
56
section,
8
insufficient-
meant
on
a
lot
area
in
article
56,
section
8,
insufficient
minimum
with
article
56
section,
8,
insufficient
minimum
lot,
frontage,
article
56,
section
8,
excessive
FA
are
a
novel,
56
section,
8,
insufficient
front
yard
setback
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
Patrick.
N
N
Additionally,
the
lot
width
required
is
60
feet
in
our
lot
is
44
feet
and
the
front
yard
setback.
We're
excited
is
a
20
foot
requirement
and
we
have
13
feet,
although
I
do
believe
from
looking
at
Boston
assessing
not
a
survey
so
I'm
just
going
for
Boston.
Assessing
that
it
does
match
existing
building
alignment,
it's
not
very
close
to
it.
N
N
N
A
AB
Good
morning
madam
chair
members
of
Lord
Jack
Duggan,
Neighborhood
Services,
just
to
go
on
record
support.
We
had
two
meetings
for
this
back
in
August.
There
were
some
issues
with
the
lot
size,
but
mr.
Harrington
afterwards
reached
out
to
some
of
the
director
butters
trying
to
work
with
them
individually
and
make
some
tweaks
some
of
them,
weren't,
really
willing
to
work
with
him.
AB
AY
Chair
members
of
the
board,
Chanin
murphy
from
city
councillor,
matt
O'malley's
office,
the
council
like
to
go
on
record
in
support
of
this
project.
However,
the
councillor
is
aware
of
some
of
the
neighbors
concerns
and
he
would
like
for
the
developer
and
the
neighborhood
to
have
an
open
dialogue
going
forward.
A
A
AC
Morning,
my
name
is
Richard
Palani
I
live
at
185,
Glen
Ellyn,
Road
I'm,
a
director
butter
to
the
property
for
the
five
violations
that
are
listed
with
certainly
reasons
for
us
to
be
opposed
to
this.
But
to
see
severity
of
these
violations
is
something
that
we'd
like
to
address.
You're
asking
for
4,300
square
feet
on
a
property.
That's
going
to
be
required
for
us.
AC
AC
The
width
again
was
addressed.
It
should
be
60
feet,
we're
talking
both
40-48
the
floor
area
ratio.
We
just
heard
was
0.5
to
3
I.
Think.
If
we
take
a
look
at
some
of
these
drawings,
we
can
probably
tweak
that
number
up
significantly
to
a
minimum,
probably
at
least
point
seven
two,
which
would
be
happy.
AC
The
front
setback
of
20
feet,
you're,
saying
13:
no
one's
addressed
the
fact
that
you're
gonna
have
a
stairway
on
this
building
as
well,
which
is
gonna,
bring
it
closer
to
the
building.
Okay,
some
additional
items
that
we're
concerned
about
is
the
side
yard
minimum.
Okay,
that's
not
listed
here.
It
should
be
10
feet.
If
you
look
at
the
property,
you'll
see
that
it's
7
feet
on
the
185
Glenallen
side
and
you'll
see
10
feet
on
the
abutting,
the
other
abutting
side
just.
AC
AC
Lot
is
approximately
4,300
square
feet
as
well:
okay
and
my
property
also
slopes
significantly
in
the
back
as
well.
So
I
have
a
very
good
eye
gauge
of
all
of
that:
okay,
I'm,
assuming
that
when
you
do
the
sidewalk
measurements,
you're
measuring
from
the
foundation
of
the
building
to
the
side
lot,
if
you
take
the
overhang
of
the
roof
on
this
property,
you're
gonna
bring
it
another
foot
closer
on
both
sides.
AC
So
now
you're
at
six
feet
from
the
property
and
nine
feet
on
the
other
side,
I
might
add,
on
the
nine
the
side
of
the
building.
That's
nine
feet.
Okay,
that
nine
feet
actually
is
running
in
the
walkway
of
the
building;
there's
no
additional
space
between
that
building.
So
if
you
were
in
the
walkway,
you'd
be
nine
feet
away
from
that.
AC
I
look
at
if
the
requirements
of
what
is
required,
not
a
builder
here.
This
is
an
additional
one
that
that
should
be
required.
You
need
to
have
30
feet.
You
don't
have
30
feet
up
in
the
back
to
challenge
the
height
of
the
building.
I
believe
that
you
need
only
35
feet.
I
think
that
the
drawings
show
this
building
at
34
feet
two
inches,
but
that's
from
the
top
of
the
foundation.
We
take
the
foundation
to
the
slab.
AC
AC
Maybe
we
could
ask
that
if,
if
there
is
some
concern
about
this,
that
someone
should
look,
these
are
the
very
things
that
you've
asked
for
in
order
to
build
it,
but
the
neighborhood
is
built
predominantly
of
one
and
a
half
story:
capes
there's
one
two
family
building
on
the
area
which
happens
to
be
on
the
piece
of
property.
That's.
A
Know
the
reason
that
we
need
to
stick
to
what
the
cited
violations
are
is
cuz.
That's
what
we're.
Judging
the
project
on
there's
been
analysis
already
conducted
by
ISD.
So
can
I?
Listen.
Can
I,
hear
the
next
person
because
it
looks
to
me
like
you've,
covered
the
cited
violations
and
stated
your
concerns
about
those
I'm.
A
A
AC
BT
My
name
is
Craig
Stefano
I
live
at
186
school
in
Island
Road
across
the
street.
I
have
concerns
about
the
shadows.
I
have
concerns
about
everything
that
just
been
put
before
work;
I,
won't
repeat
them
all,
but
I'm
here
to
let
you
know
that
the
support
I
don't
know
where
that's
coming
from,
because
everybody
has
signed
letters
against
everybody
and.
BU
Madam
chair
members,
or
my
name,
is
Brian
Tainan
I'm
here
on
behalf
and
by
my
father,
John
tiny,
moons,
the
property
directly
across
the
street
at
182
Atlanta
on
the
road
on
top
of
what's
already
been
brought
up
here.
Some
of
the
issues
that
he
would
like
me
to
state
on
his
behalf
is
the
potential
definition
of
home
value
loss
of
privacy
due
to
the
fact
that
the
height
of
the
house
being
directly
in
front
of
ours
obstruction
of
view
thus
height.
BU
The
hospital
also
interfere
with
long-held
views
that
they've
had
42
years
of
the
Charles
River
Valley
below
and
the
hills
the
line
1
through
128,
which
was
also
a
selling
point
to
him
initially
buying
the
house.
The
project
also
called
greater
congestion,
and
it
already
congested
area
mentioned
the
parking,
but
I
think
that's
a
moot
point
with
you
at
this
point,
there's
already
over
density
in
the
block
amplified
by
the
fact
that
they'll
be
right
next
to
a
two-family
home.
BU
BU
BU
A
N
Right
banja,
my
client
tells
me
that
it's
been
taxed
as
a
separate
parcel
and
he
did
not
subdivide
it
and
we
don't
have
any
record
of
that.
What
I
am
hearing
is
the
primary
form
of
Zoning
relief
that
we're
receiving
is
is
based
around
the
lot
size
and
everyone
that
spoke
in
opposition
thinks
that
it
doesn't
fit
within
the
neighborhood,
although
they
all
live
on
a
similar
sized
log
with
a
similar
use
in
similar
parking
and
similar
dimensions.
So
what
is
good
for
them
apparently
doesn't
work
so.
A
A
B
The
next
two
cases
calling
boa
seven
three:
two
four:
five:
nine
four
to
ten
Coughlin
street
there's
a
companion
case,
boa
seven,
three,
two
four:
five:
eight
118
to
122
Tremont's
tree.
This
is
before
detent
Coughlin.
This
is
erect
a
four
unit
townhouse
the
violation,
article
51
section:
eight
townhouse
building
four
units
is
forbidden:
Article,
51,
section,
nine,
the
floor:
ta
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
51,
the
height,
is
excessive
article
51,
the
front
yard
is
insufficient.
Article
51,
the
side
yard
is
insufficient.
Article
51,
section
56
51-46
our
feet,
biting
design.
B
118
to
122
trim
on
this
is
directly
three
townhouse
with
parking
violation.
Article
51
section,
8,
Tom
house
building
is
forbidden.
Nautical
51
section
9,
Claudia
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
51,
the
height,
is
excessive
article
51,
the
front
yard
is
insufficient.
Article
51,
section,
9,
side
yard
is
insufficient
and
article
51
section
9
Reyat,
is
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record
place.
Patrick.
N
Madam
chair,
we
have
two
sister
applications.
It
was
one
lot
with
a
totaling,
seven
townhouses.
It's
worth
mentioning
that
in
the
beginning
of
this
project
we
had
a
proposed
a
single
unit.
Apartment
building.
Excuse
me
a
single
apartment,
building
on
the
lot
with
23
units
and
through
the
long
initially
contentious.
Now
less
so
the
neighborhood
process.
N
We
came
to
find
a
need
for
townhouses
appropriate
from
the
community
standpoint
the
we
are
proposing.
So
it's
two
separate
building
applications
because
they're
not
contiguous
on
Tremont
Street,
as
the
law
is
the
corner
of
Trey
Mont
and
coupling.
We
have
four
excuse
me:
three
townhouses,
each
approximately
2,300
square
feet
in
three
bedrooms
with
two
parking
spaces
each
over
four
stories.
The
first
story
is
a
parking
primarily
in
a
long
Cullen
Street
on
the
corner
is
the
other
four
townhouses
in
the
same
configuration
three
bedrooms,
2,300
square
feet,
two
parking
spaces
over
four
stories.
A
N
X
X
L
BV
Madam
chair
members
aboard
Warren
Riley
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services.
There
were
three
separate
meetings
in
which
the
project
drastically
responded
to
the
concerns
of
the
community,
and
there
was
favorable
support
of
the
outcome
of
the
third
final
meeting
and
they
had
worse
support
for
the
Brighton,
also
Improvement
Association.
So
we
would
like
to
go
on
record
and
support.
Thank
you.
Good.
BW
Q
AG
AX
A
B
B
This
is
to
install
a
curb
cut
to
rip
patio
the
condo
unit
and
provide
to
compact
car
parking
spaces
violation.
Is
article
10,
section,
one
limitation
of
parking
areas
particle
sixty
two
section:
62
twenty-nine
the
design
and
maneuverability
and
buffering
article
62
section,
eight,
the
reduction
of
a
usable
open
space.
They
have
an
address
for
the
record.
Please.
BC
BC
BC
It'll
be
okay;
nothing
nothing's
changed
that
since
that
tastes,
we
made
one
small
little
adjustment
to
the
plan
to
provide
some
more
room
by
moving
over
a
parking
space
a
little
bit
closer
to
our
property.
22
we've
also
reduced
the
card
cut
from
15
to
12
feet,
which
was
recommended
by
Todd
mining
of
Public
Works
changed.
AT
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
John
Allison
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services
on
behalf
of
Chris
Breen,
would
like
to
be
newly
recorded
in
opposition
to
this
project.
The
abutters
have
continued
to
raise
concerns
over
the
safety
and
maneuverability
of
the
proposed
curb
cut.
In
recently,
our
office
has
received
a
number
of
calls
indicating
that
opposition
to
the
project
has
increased.
That
being
said,
the
applicant
has
completed
the
community
process
and
been
in
communication
with
their
director
butters
and
has
proposed
a
number
of
changes
to
the
proposal.
I
BD
BD
You
it's
not
a
driveway.
It
breaks
all
of
the
zoning
rules
for
a
driveway,
it's
impossible
for
a
car
to
make
that
tight
turn
and
get
in
and
out
of
the
driveway
with
permit
parking
on
that
street.
The
street
is
only
15
feet
wide
with
the
car
park
there,
it's
only
8
and
a
half
feet
from
the
tire
of
the
car
to
the
curb
it's
bound
to
lead
to
damage
to
the
parked
vehicles
to
the
foundation
and
side
walls
of
my
house.
The
proposed
parking
space
is
extremely
narrow.
BD
It's
very
close
to
the
side
of
my
house.
It
will
only
leave
two
and
a
half
feet
between
the
car
and
the
side
of
my
house.
That
means
it'll
be
impossible
to
get
into
the
cars
potential
damage
to
the
side
of
our
house
every
time
the
car
is
open.
Also,
that
is
where
the
kitchen
and
bedrooms
of
my
house
are.
It
will
be
idling
cars,
they'll
be
Hume,
carbon-monoxide,
noise
and
smoke
increase
noise
safety
issue
to
the
residents
of
the
building.
A
previous
owner
tried
to
get
the
same
variance
in
2010
and
it
was
denied.
BX
C
B
It's
sufficient
of
the
traditional
Lodi
area
for
dwelling
unit,
article
50,
section
29,
excessive
fer
article
50,
section
29,
excessive
building
height
article
50,
section
29,
excessive
number
of
storeys
article
50,
insufficient
usable,
open
space
per
dwelling
unit
on
article
50,
insufficient
front
yard
setback,
article
50,
section,
29,
insufficient
side,
yard
setback,
article
50,
section,
29,
insufficient,
Rea
yard
setback,
particle
50,
section,
43
la
street
parking,
insufficient
article
50,
section
43,
insufficient
Street
loading
name,
an
address
for
the
record.
Please
Patrick.
N
A
N
The
again
it
is
a
3f
for
thousands
of
distant.
The
lot
is
31313
square
feet.
The
use
is
not
allowed,
as
it
exceeds
a
three
family
dwelling
unit,
but
it
is
very
close
to
the
four
thousand.
If
it
were
for
each
additional
unit
did
none
of
the
amounts
added
for
each
additional
unit.
It
would
be
still
it
would
still
be
seeking
relief
if
it
was
allowed
in
allowed
use,
but
the
lot
is
consistent
with
what
would
be
appropriate
again.
N
The
middle
area
per
unit
is
two
thousand
square
feet
and
we
have
thirty
one
thousand
square
feet.
The
lot
width
is
forty-five
feet.
We
have
one
hundred
and
sixty
three
feet
for
a
lot
with
frontage
is
the
same.
The
FA
are,
we
are
in
excess,
its
0.8
is
what
is
allowed
and
we
have
a
one
point:
five,
nine,
just
less
than
double
that
amount.
The
building
height
again
is
thirty-five
feet,
which
would
be
consistent
with
a
three
family
dwelling
unit
and
we
have
55
feet.
AB
N
N
It's
kind
of
an
unusual
lot
just
to
say
that
it
is
modal,
but
I
could
say
that
it's
consistent
because
the
other
you
measure
it
from
one
side
of
the
street
from
the
public
way
all
the
way
to
the
next
public
way,
and
we
don't
have
a.
We
only
have
two
other
buildings
and
they
appear
to
both
be
on
on
the
lot
line,
but
they
don't
know
that
it's
modal.
It's
certainly
consistent
with
what
what
is
on
that
side
of
the
street
at
the
front
of.
N
N
A
W
BL
U
N
V
A
N
A
BP
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
Joshua
McFadden
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood
Services
Bible
on
record
in
support
of
this
project
since
the
last
deferral,
the
applicant
garden
to
support
of
the
abutters
on
the
street
as
well
as
on
DSN.
I,
as
well
as
a
new
mark,
evens
Business
Association.
We
have
both
letters
here.
BP
I
know
there
were
various
mitigation
measures
and
concerns
from
DSN
I
on
regarding
lack
of
affordability,
I'm
on
site,
as
well
as
traffic
and
parking
and
the
a
deed
restriction
beyond
the
seven
units,
as
well
as
on
Newmarket
business,
business
association,
notification,
traffic
changes,
the
stipulation
that
there
will
be
no
residential
street
permit
parking,
as
well
as
the
understanding
that
there
will
be
night
loading
and
noise
in
the
area,
because
it's
new
market,
the
Business
Association.
We
have
both
letters,
one
file
as
well.
Madam.
BR
A
BR
We
have
stipulations
with
that.
We
we
are.
We
will
support
the
project,
happy
sports
project
with
stipulations
that
we'd
like
in
the
Zoning
Board
of
appealable,
which
deal
with
three
things.
One
is
if
there,
what
is
that
access
can't
be
impeded
to
our
parking
and
through
our
vendors
and
commercial
merchants
in
the
area,
we
don't
want
any
resident
parking,
only
requests
on
that
street.
We
are
during
daytime
hours.
BR
We
also
have
requested
that
potential
changes
or
discussions
on
traffic
flow
to
shut,
wonder
Shirley,
Street,
going
forward
that
there
be
public
meetings
and
that
New
Market
Business
Association
be
involved,
and
also
that
commercial
and
industrial
areas
have
certain
inherent
noises
and
sounds
and
early
morning
pickups
and
that
kind
of
thing
the
developer
we
have.
We
have
been
working
with
hauling
construction
to.
They
will
agree
that
that
they're
coming
to
the
nooses-
and
we
are
asking
that
that
we
put
into
the
leases
that
the
tenants
recognize
that
you
know
these.
A
N
A
Is
your
father
and
and
the
items
to
our
one
two:
three:
it's
identified
by
the
New
Market
Business
Association.
It
sounds
that
all
of
these
need
to
have
some
kind
of
community
process
organized
by
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services,
so
they're
really
really
the
one
that
can
be
accommodated
through
this
is
to
the
each
restriction
right.
N
S
S
A
B
Boa
seven
to
nine
four
thirty:
three:
twenty
two
to
twenty
six
plane
failed
Street,
this
direct,
a
new
three
single-family
residential
townhouse,
the
front
porch
red
act
on
an
existing
foundation
on
a
vacant.
Lot
proposed
for
three
are
three
parking
violations:
article
55,
section
nine
front
yard
is
insufficient
article
55
section,
nine,
the
flirty
a
ratio
is
excessive
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
good.
BQ
BQ
Was
a
there
was
completely
different.
There
was
completely
different
project
now,
it's
absolutely
new
project,
absolutely
fully
redesigned
redesign
project
is
nothing
like
it
was
originally.
There
was
a
garages
over
there.
There
was
a
tree
three
bedrooms
as
it's
a
it's
a
garage.
It
was
illuminated
that
the
the
high
was
the
decrease
there.
It
was
a
trip
three
units
with
the
three
bedrooms.
Now
it's
a
three
units
with
the
two
bedrooms
and
attic.
It
means
it
completely.
It's
a
fully
redesigned
unit
project.
BQ
A
BQ
A
CA
All
up,
Carrie
and
Paula
preparing
architects
in
Westborough
I
was
born
in
there
was
new
project
was
originally
designed
and
build.
It
was
actually
demolished.
After
some
reason,
I
was
brought
in
after
that.
So
I
redesigned
the
building
based
on
meeting
with
their
neighborhood
and
Jamaica
Plain
zoning,
and
we
got
everything
to
prove
that
way.
CA
A
CA
A
BQ
BQ
BM
BV
BQ
A
AT
A
Okay,
the
architect
sees
what's
required
on
the
fer
and,
what's
being
proposed.
BQ
A
I
B
A
A
I
S
N
N
It's
approximately
a
thousand
square
feet,
and
what
you
have
before
you
is
is
a
drawing
pretty
for
two
spaces.
Only
this
space
on
the
left
right
is
being
utilized
as
a
veterinary
clinic
in
seeking
the
relief
drawing
a
201
shows.
The
hashed
area
is
not
in
contract
and
then
there's
three
clinical
rooms
that
are
existing,
that
there's
no
work
to
be
done,
just
the
they
were
used
previously
by
the
chiropractor,
and
now
it
will
be
used
for
veterinary
purposes.
A
BK
Afternoon,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
David
Connor
from
the
mayor's
office.
Neighborhood
Services
would
like
to
on
record
in
support.
I
held
an
on-site
meeting
for
this
project,
called
the
abutters
expressed
their
support
for
the
project
as
well.
They
did
meet
with
the
Columbia
Seminole
Civic
Association.
However,
due
to
scheduling
conflicts,
the
general
membership
would
not
able
to
vote
on
this
project.
They
did
present
before
the
planning
committee,
who
has
taken
a
position
of
non
opposition,
because
the
general
membership
has
not
voted.
Thank
you
thank.
N
B
B
This
is
to
add
a
new
bathroom
laundry
playroom
and
home
office
in
the
basement
as
part
of
unit
one
violation,
statical,
sixty-five
section:
nine
fluidy,
a
ratio
is
excessive.
There
is
built,
there
is
Building
Code
section,
the
8th
edition,
780
CMR,
7
o.y
for
705
point:
eight
one
allowable
openings
openings
are
not
allowed
in
exterior
walls
where
the
fire
separation
distance
is
less
than
three
feet.
Name
an
address
for
the
record.
Please
Harold.
AS
CB
S
CB
CB
S
BK
Good
afternoon,
madam
chair
members,
the
board,
my
name,
is
David
Potter
from
the
mayor's
office
and
he
but
services
elected
on
record
in
support
of
this
project
also
held
monoxide
abutters
meeting.
All
the
abutters
and
attendants
express
their
support
for
the
project
similar
to
the
last
project.
Columbia
saticons,
Civic,
Association
general
membership
has
not
had
a
chance
to
vote
it
because
of
scheduling
conflicts.
However,
their
planning
committee
did
vet
the
process
and
was
taking
a
position
of.
Thank
you.
Thank.
BM
U
B
This
is
just
a
change
architects
from
a
three
family
to
a
for
family
and
renovate
and
install
sprinklers,
and
this
is
the
legalize
the
existing
condition.
The
violation
is
article
60
section.
40
parking
is
insufficient
for
additional
unit.
In
article
60
section,
a
a
multi
families
have
been
in
a
three
of
6,000
sub
district
name.
An
address
for
the
record.
Please.
BZ
A
BZ
BZ
BZ
S
W
A
So
may
I
recommend
something
it's
great
to
see
that
you
will
be
working
being
what
if
it
make
sense
for
you
to
the
furthest
case,
one
more
time
and
come
in
with
an
application
that
proposes
to
combine
the
logs
so
that
there
is
insurance,
that
everything
is
taken
care
of
and
to
adjust
the
parking.
So
that
they're
not
thanks
again.
AN
BO
BZ
A
B
A
B
This
was
brought
through
the
small
board
we
recommended
they
cover
from
the
logic
board
air.
They
would
like
to
convert
the
home
office
in
to
existing
rooms
of
an
existing
one
family
and
add
a
sign
of
the
company
on
the
front
lawns.
The
violation
office
with
a
mortgage
company,
the
violation
of
article
10,
section
two
accessory
use
restriction
in
a
residential
district
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
A
AJ
We
occupied
the
property
we
want
to
use
one
or
two
rooms
and
the
first
floor
to
be
able
to
see
clients.
Of
course
we're
not
going
to
have
a
high
traffic.
It's
probably
going
to
be
one
client
per
week,
because
we
do
a
lot
of
computer
work
and
a
lot
of
communication
with
clients.
So
we
would
like
the
board
to
approve
us
to
have
that
home
office
and
be
able
to
operate
there
as
well
as
live
there.
A
AJ
L
AJ
A
L
AJ
A
S
B
B
This
is
the
change
honestly
to
include
a
wireless
telecommunications
facility
installed
nine
new
wireless
antennas
and
six
IR.
You
concealed
behind
a
screen
wall,
enclosure
on
an
existing
roof
of
a
church,
rectory
and
paint
it
to
match
the
building
and
install
equipment,
cabinets
gas
generator
and
associated
cables.
The
violations
article
86
section
six
any
antenna
in
the
residential
district
is
a
conditional
use
name
and
address
for
the
record
place
attorney.
A
CC
A
CC
I
just
handed
a
set
of
photo
simulations
and
clipped
drawings
together.
That
is
both
the
BPD.
A
revised
and
approved
plans,
together
with
the
mock-up
photo
simulations
we've
reduced
the
size
of
the
footprint
of
the
cabinet
by
2.
Feet,
which
works
out
to
about
16
square
feet,
also
reduced
the
height
of
it
by
a
foot,
and
it's
now
going
to
be
instead
of
a
faux
chimney,
it's
a
faux
penthouse
with
a
hipped
roof
and
we've
actually
also
reduced.
We
changed
out
the
antenna
equipment
on
the
interior.
CC
CC
S
S
AD
CC
That's
actually
at
the
ground
level,
so
the
cabinet's.
So
if
you,
if
you're
looking
at
sheet
XIII
to
the
left
hand,
side
you'll,
see
the
the
proposed
faux
penthouse
is,
is
right
almost
in
the
center
of
the
existing
building,
and
it
contains
the
nine
proposed
antennas,
then
there's
a
cable
tray
connecting
it
which
goes
across
the
roof
and
then
down
the
side
of
the
building
to
a
screened-in
enclosure.
It's
a
steel
pad
for
the
actual
computer
equipment
that
that
supports
the
antennas.
I
CC
A
B
Chair
that
concludes
the.
That
concludes
today's
meeting.
With
that
we
have
the
hearings
on
the
zoning
advisory
subcommittee,
which
was
held
on
September
21st
I'm
gonna
go
over
those
right
now.
The
case
boa
7,
3,
0,
8,
9,
9
362.
Some
ministry
was
the
confirm,
actually
is
a
single
family
and
change
life
into
a
two
family
at
a
pitch
roof
and
dormice.
It
was
approved
with
beauty,
a
design
review
and
no
those
are
the
proviso
that
no
building
code
relief.
B
The
next
case,
boa
7,
1,
7,
699,
182
West,
8th
Street,
was
approved,
was
to
remove
deck
and
add
a
new
egress
case.
Boa
7,
3
3,
7
4,
8,
20,
Craven
Street,
was
actually
pocket
for
one
vehicle
was
approved
with
BPD
a
case.
Boa
7,
2,
6,
3,
3
2
for
the
six
auckland
street
was
deferred
and
she
also
deferred
today
case
boa
seven,
three
one,
two
eight
seven
ten
Belton
Street
was
to
build
an
addition
to
be
handicapped
accessible
at
the
rear
of
the
home.
B
It
was
approved
with
BPD
a
case,
boa
seven,
three
one
one
one
311
Ella
Street
was
an
erect
a
third
level
by
adding
2
dormers
on
one
on
each
side.
It
was
approved
at
BPD
a
case
bo
a700,
976
41,
myopia
Road
was
have
a
second
floor.
This
projects
allowing
open
forum
to
a
home
on
the
street.
It
was
approved
with
BPD
a
he's
Bo
a
7
0
2
3
3
3
207
Savannah
Avenue
was
an
extent
living
space
of
the
basement
extent
to
family
residential
dwell.
B
It
was
approved
case
boa
seven,
three,
six,
six,
one,
seven
68
louder's
lane
it
was
at
a
master
bath
of
a
first
Laura
Sun
porch
was
approved
with
BPD
a
case,
boa
seven-30,
e16,
82,
Cummins,
Hale
Highway.
We
just
try.
It
was
deferred
to
the
full
board,
which
we
just
heard
today
and
approved
case
boa
72,
972,
323,
225
chestnut
square.
It
was
denied
without
prejudice
for
a
no-show
case.
Boa
736,
6:05
36
Maxfield
Street
was
a
reconstruction
of
a
porch,
was
approved
with
BPD
a
case.
B
Boa
735
9
9
0
to
75
to
277
Summit
Avenue,
was
deferred
to
the
small
Zoning
Board
on
1026
at
5
o'clock,
and
the
last
two
cases
were
the
Reid
discussions
to
have
boa
7:00
to
8:00
h76
22
Albion
place,
which
was
deferred,
was
also
deferred
again
today
in
case
boa
7
to
155
120
Capon
Avenue
was
to
confirm
a
one
existing
one
family
dwelling.
It
was
approved
with
be
PDA.
That
concludes
the
zoning
advisory
subcommittee.