►
From YouTube: Zoning Board of Appeal Public Hearings 3-22-22
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
A
A
The
information
for
connecting
to
this
hearing
is
listed
on
today's
hearing
agenda,
which
is
posted
on
the
public
notices
page
of
the
city's
website.
Boston.Gov
members
of
the
public
will
enter
the
virtual
hearing
as
attendees,
which
means
you
will
not
see
yourself
on
the
screen
and
you
will
be
muted
throughout
unless
administratively
unmuted.
When
asked
to
comment
board
members,
applicants
and
their
attorneys
or
representatives
will
participate
in
the
hearing
as
panelists
and
they
will
appear
alongside
the
presentation
materials
when
speaking
panelists
are
strongly
encouraged
to
keep
video
on
while
presenting
to
the
board.
A
A
Select,
yes
and
you
should
be
able
to
talk
if
you
are
connected
to
the
hearing
by
telephone,
please
press
star,
9
to
raise
and
lower
your
hand.
You
must
press
star
six
to
unmute
yourself
after
you
receive
the
request
from
the
host
again.
If
you
are
here
by
telephone,
please
press
star
nine
to
raise
and
lower
your
hand
and
star
six
to
unmute
yourself.
A
Those
called
upon
to
comment
will
be
asked
to
state
their
name
and
address
first
and
then
can
provide
the
comment
in
the
interest
of
time
and
to
ensure
that
you
have
enough
time
to
do
so.
Please
raise
your
hand
as
soon
as
mr
fortune
reads.
The
address
into
the
record
do
not
raise
your
hand
before
the
relevant
address
is
called
or
the
meeting
host
will
not
know
to
call
on
you
at
the
appropriate
time.
A
So
let's
go
and
get
a
roll
call.
Mr
fortune.
A
Oh
good
morning,
mr
robinson.
A
Good
morning,
so
this
is
a
six-member
board
and
so
I'm
just
informing
all
applicants
that
they
will
need
five.
A
E
E
Next
is
the
extensions
calling
the
first
case
case:
boa
659,
702
86
to
88
north
washington
street
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
F
Good
morning
dennis
quilty
attorney
representing
the
appellant.
Can
you
hear
me
all
right?
Yes,
thank
you,
mr
colte.
E
Thank
you
for
8688
north
washington
street
the
board
originally
granted
this
relief
on
may
26th
of
2017..
The
case
was
appealed
to
the
superior
court,
and
so
is
the
subject
to
litigation
tolling.
The
court
case
was
dismissed
on
june
5th
2019
with
litigation
tolling.
The
new
expiration
of
the
relief
would
have
been
may
16th
of
2021.
E
E
A
E
F
Yes,
sir,
thank
you
very
much.
Dennis
quilty
attorney
representing
the
appellant
at
this
location.
Further
to
discussions,
I've
had
with
attorney
groom,
we'd,
withdraw
this
matter
and
I
have
filed,
as
of
yesterday,
a
request
for
a
board
final
arbiter
on
this.
This
is
a
matter
concerning
my
expiration.
A
E
I
E
H
E
This
is
the
combined
lot
of
two
thousand
eight
hundred
and
eighty
one
square
feet
and
another
lot
of
two
thousand
three
hundred
and
four
square
feet
to
create
one
new
lot:
totaling
five
thousand
one
hundred
and
eighty
five
square
feet
to
be
known
as
thirty
nine
hancock
and
erecting
new
reduced
from
a
four
family
to
a
three
family
residential
structure
with
five
off
street
parking,
the
violations,
article
65
section
42
conform
to
an
existing
building
alignment,
article
65,
section
9.
The
lot
width
is
insufficient.
E
Article
65,
section
9
lot:
frontage,
isn't
sufficient
article
65
section
9,
the
fourier
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
65,
section
9,
the
billinghames
accessibility
stories,
article
65
section
on
the
front
yard,
isn't
sufficient
article
6569
side
yard,
isn't
sufficient
and
article
65
section
9,
the
rare
yard
is
insufficient
name
it
out.
Just
for
the
record,
please
thank.
J
You,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
attorney
jeff
drago
with
the
law
office
of
dragon
scanner,
with
the
business
address
of
11
beacon
street
representing
the
owner
developer,
willie
mandrell
for
the
project
at
39
hancock
street,
as
was
mentioned,
so
this
project
had
been
deferred
and
has
been
modified
since
that
last
deferral
we
have
removed
a
fourth
unit.
So
we
are
now
at
three
units,
residential
units
and
five
parking
spaces
in
making
that
modification
we've
removed,
violations
and
modified
some
violations.
J
A
Oh
so
counselor,
just
as
I've
always
stated
in
the
past
to
you,
we
are
kind
of
not
interested
on
where
you
started
off,
but
where
you,
where
you
bounce
off
from
the
from
the
zoning,
so
tell
me
so
obviously
this
is
a
3f
district.
What's
the
lot
size
on
this.
J
J
Sure
our
violations
are
lot
width
and
lot
frontage,
so
50
would
be
required.
We
have
38
feet,
2
inches
far
0.5
would
be
allowed.
We
are
now
at
0.78
height,
I
mentioned
we
did
remove
stories,
but
we
I'm
sorry
feet.
J
We
do
still
have
stories,
so
we
have
three
stories
and
two
and
a
half
feet
because
what's
allowed,
but
that's
typical
of
this
area,
it's
a
3,
f
district
side
yard,
although
we
do
have
a
driveway,
we
do
have
on
the
right
side,
our
driveway,
but
we
have
one
foot
on
the
left,
hand,
side
and
five
feet
would
be
required,
but
there
is
a
driveway
on
the
left-hand
side
as
well
to
the
neighboring
building
front
yard.
We
actually
have
seven
foot,
six
and
fifteen
would
be
required.
J
J
There's
not
there's
only
two
front
decks
at
the
front
side
of
the
opening.
J
They
will
the
first
floor
unit
is
accessible
via
ramp.
It
comes
around
the
side
of
the
building
from
where
the
parking
would
line
up
and
comes
in
right
through
the
front.
J
Don't
are
the
plans
up
right
now,
there's
a
whole
certified
plot
plan
section
and
it
shows
five
parking
spaces.
What
we've
done
is
the
the
lot
that
a
butts
pace
and
ave
has
five
angle
parking
spaces.
That
would
be
the
parking
would
be
accessed
through
hancock
on
a
10-foot
driveway
that
would
come
down
the
side
of
the
building
and
enter
those
diagonal
spots.
Originally
we
had
a
curve
cut
along
payson,
so
you
would
enter
through
hancock
exit
through
basin
and
working
with
the
community.
J
They
wanted
that
sealed
off
just
some
grass
area
and
fencing
because
pace
nav
has
had
a
lot
of
vehicular
issues
with
cars
racing
down
the
street,
so
we
have
everything
entering
and
entering
along
hancock.
When
you
pull
out
of
those
spaces,
you
can
back
up.
We
have
a
paver
area
or
a
10
foot
paver
area
in
the
back
that
those
cars
would
back
into
and
then
be
able
to
pull
out
the
front
way
through
handcuffs.
K
Planes
are
good,
I
think
the
scale
and
height
of
the
current
proposal
fits
on
hancock
street.
It's.
It
is
tight
on
this
sort
of
side
yard
dimensions,
but
it
is
up
against
a
retail
at
the
corner.
A
L
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board
denise
desantos
here
from
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services,
I
would
like
to
go
on
record
and
state
that
the
applicant
has
met
with
the
community
a
few
different
times
and
has
met
with
the
community's
needs.
They
have
direct
the
butter
support
and
main
street
support
at
this
time.
Then
our
office
would
like
to
defer
to
the
board.
Thank
you.
K
K
Is
a
maneuverability
diagram
on
a100
that
does
show
how
the
vehicle
access
and
backing
up
into
the
area
that
council
sort
of
explained.
It
seems
to
work
fairly
well,
not
perfect,
but
I
think.
O
O
You
everybody
else
yeah.
I
do
have
a
raised
hand
from
joseph.
Are
you
looking
to
give
testimony
on
this
case?
Not
I
will
lower
you.
Oh
go
ahead.
O
P
A
All
those
in
favor
aye
any
opposed
motion
carries
before
before
we
begin
our
9
30
hearings.
Just
a
reminder.
This
is
a
six-member
board
and
applicants
need
five
members
in
support
of
their
project
for
the
motion
to
carry.
Thus,
applicants
do
have
the
option
for
asking
for
an
administrative
deferral.
E
A
What
are
you?
Are
you
requesting
a
deferral,
we're
requesting
a
deferral
to
revise.
A
Okay
and
how
long
do
you
think
that
will
take.
A
E
Hearing
none
I'll
call
the
first
case
calling
case
boa
one:
two:
nine
five,
three:
five,
four
six
yarmouth
street
this
is
remove
the
existing
fire
escape
and
replace
with
red,
porches
and
exterior
fire
scare
and
removing
the
existing
ground
level
deck
and
building
new
patio
and
fencing
the
violations.
Article
64
section,
9.4,
townhouse
row,
house
extension
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
T
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board
attorney
ryan
spitz
of
counsel
to
adams
and
morancy,
with
the
business
address
of
350
west
broadway.
Here
with
me
today,
is
the
owner
and
also
slash
architect,
mr
david
o'sullivan.
T
As
stated,
this
is
a
proposal
to
remove
an
existing
fire
escape
on
the
rear
of
the
property
and
replace
with
new
rear
porches
and
a
new
exterior
fire
stair
for
safer
means
of
egress.
On
the
first
and
second
floor,
a
window
will
be
converted
into
a
door
for
a
means
of
egress.
On
the
third
floor,
a
whole
new
door
opening
will
be
constructed
for
egress.
T
T
The
parking
area
as
you'll
see
from
these
plants
will
remain
the
same
at
this
point
in
time.
I
can
open
it
up
for
questions,
but
prior
to
then
the
owner
did
have
a
preliminary
discussion
with
the
south
end
landmarks
and
under
item
three
under
the
general
guidelines.
It
does
not
apply
as
it
is
not
in
the
front
of
the
building
or
nor
visible
from
on
top
of
the
roof
is
not
visible
so
in
the
rear.
This
the
standards
do
not
apply
here.
For
the
south
end
landmarks.
A
So,
are
you
saying
that
this
is
not
bracket
supported,
then.
U
No,
it
is
supported
on
steel
posts,
thin
steel
posts
and
metal
railings.
Much
like
most
of
the
others
down
the
street
are
so
there's
two
posts
coming
down
for
the
deck
and
then
a
couple
posts
at
the
end
of
the
stairwells.
A
U
V
U
It's
a
little
unusual
in
the
sense
that
my
neighbor
to
my
left
from
the
back.
It
sticks
out
and
their
fire
escaped
from
the
front,
and
my
neighbor
to
the
right
of
me
sticks
out
farther
than
me
and
they
have
a
separate
fire
escape.
So,
instead
of
being
able
to
have
a
balcony
that
connects
units,
there's
no
ability
on
my
unit
to
connect
to
another
one.
Hence
the
need
for
the
stair.
U
As
far
as
the
decks
or
the
stairs
you
talk
ears
stairs,
I
had
looked,
I
had
looked
at
a
spiral
stair
going
down,
but
was
thinking
that
this
was
much
safer
and
where
the
buildings
on
either
side
of
me
stick
out
beyond
me.
I
didn't
think
this
was
too
much
of
an
impact.
K
W
Yes,
good
morning,
madam
chair
and
members
of
the
board
kim
crusoe
with
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services,
our
office
held
in
a
butters
meeting
in
february
of
2022,
where
a
sport
was
shown
by
the
abutters.
They
also
received
the
support
of
the
cosmopolitan
neighborhood
association.
At
this
time,
our
office
would
like
to
defer
to
the
board
on
this
matter.
Thank
you.
X
O
A
You
take
that
offline,
please,
mr
hampton
did
the
bpda
have
a
recommendation
on
this.
B
No
official
recommendation,
but
we
understand,
based
on
what
the
existing
conditions
are
and
the
problem
with
connecting
to
the
buildings.
Usually
we
support
bracket
only,
but
since
this
is
a
fire
escape,
we
can.
We
don't
need
design
review,
but
we
can
go
on
record
as
a
in
support
of
this
proposal.
E
Following
your
next
case,
calling
doa
one
two,
eight
nine
seven:
zero
zero.
Five,
fifty
nine
are
rear
east
fifth
street.
This
is
a
structure,
is
a
three-story
three
condo
building
owner
of
condo
three
will
construct
a
porch
measurement
6x8
to
both
condo
3
and
condo.
2.
upon
complete
completion
owner
of
condo2
will
reimburse
the
owner
for
condo3
for
half
the
total
cost.
The
violations,
article
68
section,
29
group
structure,
restrictions,
the
access
article,
68,
section,
8,
insufficient
side,
dead
setback
and
article
68,
section
8,
insufficient
radio
setback
name
and
address
for
the
records.
AA
You
got
it
okay,
my
name
is
william
mohan
address
is
59
carding
road
in
norton
massachusetts,
I'm
representing
dana
and
darren
hopkinson
the
owners
of
condo
number
three
third
floor
at
5,
59
r,
we're
also
speaking
for
the
owners
of
the
second
floor
that
are
going
to
be
involved
in
this
as
as
well
the
the
denial
letter
that
that
we
got.
A
Okay,
so
this
is
new
construction,
and
so,
if
it's
an
r
address
it
needed
to
come
to
this
board,
can
you
tell
us
you
know:
were
there
any
provisos
because
we
probably
approved
it
without
without
decks?
And
so
can
you
tell
us
what
the
need
is
for
this
decks
now.
AA
The
the
the
need
for
the
decks
is
is
twofold:
it's
it's
not
they're,
not
decks.
They're,
six
foot
by
six
foot
porches
in
the
in
the
right
rear
of
the
building
there
is
no.
This
has
nothing
to
do
with
the
roof
structure.
AA
AA
We're
concerned
in
two
cases
number
one,
the
the
first
and
most
important
is-
is
safety.
We
would
like
to
have
a
a
ladder
fire
ladder.
You
know
from
the
third
floor
to
the
second
floor,
the
second
floor
to
the
first
floor,
just
in
case
there's
a
there's.
We
can't
get
out
the
front
door.
Okay,.
AB
A
Drawing
in
front
of
us
does
show
us
a
rooftop,
so
is
the
roof
that
part
of
the
plant?
Oh
no.
AA
No,
no!
No.
That
was
that
that
I
I
don't
know
why
you
have
that
plan.
There
is
no
roof
that
we're
not
touching
the
roof
we
had.
We
had
filed
in
2021,
we
had
filed
for
a
roofed
act
and
we
submitted
plans,
but
we
were
told
that
there
was
a
verbal
agreement
with
the
neighborhood
neighborhood
association,
never
to
put
a
roof
deck
on
that
building,
which
which
was
not
all
to
us,
but
we
we.
A
May
I
ask
you
one
more
question:
your
rear.
Your
rear
yard
is
insufficient,
so
tell
me
your
distance
from
your
building
to
the
rear
yard
and
to
the
building
behind
you,
because
this
is
what
makes
it
hard
for
us,
because,
because
we
have
heard
this
case,
we've
approved
plans
for
this
case,
and
then
it
gets
difficult
when
they
come
in
to
us
again.
You
know
a
couple
years
later,
when,
with
with
requests
for
things
that
might
have
been
already
sorted
out
during
the
initial
hearing,
okay.
AA
I'll
be
happy
to
the,
and
that's
one
of
the
points
that
I
would
like
to
make.
If
you
look
at
the
plot
plan
that
was
submitted
with
this,
and
we
have
two
different
drawings
that
were
submitted
by
two
different
companies,
the
the
distance
from
the
for
the
rear
is
is
listed
as
as
three
3.9
feet
now.
There's
a
problem
with
that
now,
because
the
rear
neighbor
put
in
a
fence
and
in
order
to
get
around
the
tree
most
of
that
fence
is
on
our
property.
AA
Now,
that's
that's
that
that
can
be
adjudicated
in
another
another
time
with
another
committee,
but
that's
one
of
the
problems
that
we
have
and
and.
AC
A
AA
This
this
there's
no
there's
no
difference.
It's
3.9
feet.
That's
that's
the
distance
from
from
the
house,
the
the
deck
porch,
I
should
say,
fits
into
the
right
rear
corner
and
we.
AD
AA
K
Plans
are
fine
agree
with
the
proponent
it
aligns
with
the
rear
of
the
building.
So
it's
not
increasing
or
decreasing.
The
setback
there
is
a
drawing
in
here
that
shows
the
roof
deck
access
with
a
spiral
stair.
It
is
flagged
in
red,
but
it's
not
xed
out,
but
I'm
not
sure
why
that's
in
there
either,
but
the.
AE
K
Proposal
seems
to
be
fitting
within
the
context
of
the
existing
bill,
so
no
questions.
G
Mr
robinson,
the
the
idea
of
a
fire
ladder
from
three
to
two
to
one
in
terms
of
second
means
the
egress.
That's
a
little
on
the
shaky
side
is
when
you
agree.
K
I
I
mean
it's
not
even
it's
not
required,
because
the
building
apparently
is
sprinkled,
and
so
I
think
it's
an
extra
means
that
I
would
assume,
but
exactly
I
agree
that
it's
not
ideal
either,
but
I
think
that's
should
be
handled.
You
know,
that's
not
necessary
for
us
to,
I
think,
understand
or
hang.
AH
Hi,
madam
chair
memphis
of
the
board
haley
dillon
mayor's
office
neighborhood
services.
This
is
one
of
those
weird
instances
like
madam
chair
referred
to
when
I
held
the
abutters
meeting
for
this
building
in
2019,
the
neighbors
and
the
neighborhood
association
agreed
for
no
outdoor
space,
no
roof
decks,
no
decks,
because
this
building
is
set
back
in
the
middle
of
other
people's
backyards,
so
they
got
the
approval
of
the
neighbors
and
they
got
their
variances
to
build
this
house
and
the
people
who
bought
it
didn't
understand
the
agreement.
AH
We
do
still
have
direct
voters
in
opposition
to
decks
and
roof
texts,
but
we
would
like
to
defer
the
board.
Thank
you.
X
Good
morning
modern
literature,
members
of
the
war,
I'm
a
caleron
from
council
president
flynn's
office,
the
counselor
would
like
to
go
recurring.
Opposition
based
on
feedback
from
neighbors
about
us
at
the
gate
of
heaven,
neighborhood
association,
who
have
all
called
attention
to
concerns
on
knowledge,
disruption
and
quality
of
life
of
life,
issues
for
neighbors
on
three
different
streets
k
street
three
and
six
three
more.
However,
the
previous
project
was
supported
by
neighbors,
the
civic
group
mayor's
office
and
councillor
flynn,
specifically
because
there
was
no
deck
included
in
that
proposal.
X
AI
Adam
chair
members
of
the
board,
paul
sullivan
city
council,
large,
michael
flaherty,
council
clarity
would
like
to
note
that
the
building
was
permitted
in
the
infill,
with
the
proviso
from
this
board
that
no
roof
deck
be
built
due
to
various
concerns
from
director
butters.
He
has
issues
with
the
decks.
Therefore,
council,
friday
like
to
go
on
record
and
strong
opposition.
AA
AA
AA
AA
AA
And
you
should,
you
should
have
a
copy
of
those
petitions,
they
were
in
the
cba
folder.
Thank
you.
We.
C
This
was
approved
very
recently
with
certain
provisos
and
I
do
think
we
need
to
stick
to
those
and
it's
unfortunate
that
they
weren't
informed
of
that
at
the
time
they
bought
their
condo.
But
that
being
said,
I'd
like
to
make
a
motion
for
the
denial.
A
But
regardless
we
do
understand
that
it
might
have
not
been
because
the
plants
might
have
come
in
without
a
rooftop,
and
that
might
be
the
what
what
we
need
to
make
sure
we
clarify
when
we
do.
Our
minutes
are
make
sure
that
it's
memorialized
in
some
way
in
the
text,
in
addition
to
having
it
memorialized
in
the
plans-
and
I
think,
as
we
talked
about
last
week,
this
becomes
more
important
as
things
go
up
to
the
registry
so
miss.
Mr
ruggiero,
you
had
a
motion
for
denial.
C
E
Following
the
next
case,
calling
voa
129
4998
71
to
75
west
broadway,
this
is
the
change
of
legal
octave
in
existing
unoccupied
commercial
unit
to
bank
building
occupancy
to
be
changed
from
eight
residential
units
and
one
commercial
unit
to
eight
residential
units
and
banks.
The
violations,
article
68
section
33,
austrian
parking,
article,
68,
section,
7,
use
and
regulations
name
and
address
of
the
record.
Please.
AK
Madam
chair
members,
I
represent
jay
goldberg,
who
is
the
owner
of
the
commercial
unit
at
7175,
west
broadway
and
who
is
seeking
to
change
its
occupancy
or
to
actually
establish
a
legal
occupancy
for
the
commercial
unit.
As
a
bank,
the
unit
is
1644
square
feet.
It
is
the
ground
floor
unit
in
a
building
that
contains
this
ground
floor,
commercial
space
and
eight
residential
units
above
the
building
was
approved
in
may
of
2019.
AK
At
that
time,
it
did
in
fact
receive
a
variance
for
insufficient
off-street
parking,
as
there
is
no
parking
associated
with
the
building.
My
client
would
like
to
put
in
a
bank
tenant.
He
has
had
several
banks
approach
him
with
their
interest
in
moving
into
the
unit,
but
none
would
enter
into
a
lease
without
having
the
occupancy
in
place.
That
occupancy
requires
a
conditional
use
permit
and
for
the
record,
I
would
pause
it
that
this
specific
site
is
an
appropriate
location
for
a
bank
that
the
bank
would
not
adversely
affect
the
neighborhood.
AK
AK
No,
as
I
say,
a
number
of
banks
have
approached
my
client,
but
they
did
not
want
to
go
through
the
permitting
process
themselves.
AK
Hence
my
client
wanted
to
establish
the
occupancy
and
then
get
back
to
the
the
the
banks
that
have
expressed
interest
to
select,
which
one
would
go
in.
AL
X
AM
E
If
you're
calling
the
next
case
calling
voa
129
zero,
zero,
four
zero,
eight
glade
avenue
this
is
to
build
a
foundation
and
master
bedroom
with
deck.
On
the
first
and
second
and
third
floor,
the
violation,
article
9
section,
1,
reconstruction
extension
of
a
non-conforming
building
article
55,
section
9,
the
48
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
55,
section
9,
the
building
height,
is
excessive
in
feet.
Article
55,
section
9,
the
building,
has
excessive
stories
and
article
55
section
9
in
the
rear
yard,
is
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
AG
Good
morning,
keith
hensman
47
ken
burma
street.
AG
Well,
I'm
sorry:
it's
47
ken
burma
street
and
hall
massachusetts.
AG
So
we've
proposed,
in
addition
that
allows
each
unit
to
have
an
additional
bedroom
and
ensuite
bath
and
closet
with
it.
And
the
addition
is
off
to
the
right
side
of
the
existing
house
and
we
are
maintaining
the
same
building
line
of
the
rear
wall
of
the
house.
AG
The
idea
is
to
keep
the
look
and
historic
character
of
the
existing
house
with
the
addition.
A
Okay,
so
tell
us
about
the
distance
from
the
proposed
edge
of
the
addition
to
the
side
side,
lock
line
and
likewise.
AG
Okay,
let
me
start
with
the
rear
lot
line,
so
the
existing
rear
porch
is
17
and
a
half
feet
from
the
rear
lot
line
and
we're
proposing
extending
that
existing
porch.
AG
20
feet
is
in,
we
have
17
and
a
half
the
rear
wall.
The
house
itself
is
further
beyond
it.
22
and
a
half
feet.
AG
And
yeah,
so
the
existing
side
yard
that
the
lot
is
existing
lot
is
quite
large
and
the
side
yard,
with
the
projecting
bay,
will
be
in
excess
of
33
and
a
half
feet,
so
we're
we're
not
encroaching
on
the
side
yard
setback
there.
The
opposite
side
of
the
building.
AG
The
left
side
of
the
building
to
the
left
lot
line
is
just
shy
of
10
feet,
but
we're
not
coming
close
to
that.
We're
proposing
an
addition
on
the
offensive
side
of
the
building.
A
How
are
the
plans,
mr
robinson.
K
Plans
are
good,
you
know,
I
think
it's,
it
is
an
oversized
lot.
I
think
the
addition
is
fairly
minimal.
It
is
not
changing
any
of
the
sort
of
side
or
rear
yard,
as
it
currently
sits.
I
think
it's
pretty
straightforward.
One
question
are
these
owner
occupied
units
or
these
rental
unions.
AG
Yes,
no
that's
correct,
they're
owner
occupied
and
we
have
several
letters
in
support,
one
from
a
direct
to
butter
at
sixth
grade.
AG
So
the
lot
of
non-conforming,
it's
just
over
7
500
square
feet
and
we're
in
a
2f9
000
district,
so
would
be
required
to
be
a
9
000
square
foot
lot.
A
Yeah
the
base
lock
would
be
9
000
and
then
yep
4500,
for
which
each
additional
okay,
any
questions
from
the
board.
AG
Yes,
there
there
should
be,
I
believe,
on
on
the
first
page
of
the
pdf
there's
a
cover
sheet,
and
this
has
a
view
from
the
street
perfect.
That's
it
there.
Okay,
thank
you.
AN
Yes,
good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board
tiffany
cavallaro
here
from
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services,
I
would
like
to
go
on
record
to
say
this
proposal
was
approved
by
the
jamaica,
plain
neighborhood
council
zoning
subcommittee
back
in
january
this
year.
I
did
have
no
letters
of
our
testimony
in
opposition
at
this
time.
The
mayor's
office
would
like
to
defer
judgment.
Thank
you.
A
B
Yes,
thank
you,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board.
We
recommended
denial
without
prejudice
based
solely
on
the
addition
to
the
side.
It's
mainly
a
triple
decker
street
and
the
bpda
likes
to
keep
the
traditional
triple
decker.
Look,
I
know,
there's
support
for
it,
but
it's
just
a
precedent
that
we
really
don't
want
to
have
broached.
K
I'll
make
a
motion
to
approve
with
bpa
design
review.
I
think
it's
a
reasonable
ass
for
an
under-occupied
building.
A
All
those
in
favor
aye
aye
any
opposed.
I
will
just
voice
my
my
my
vote
in
opposition
because
I
do
believe
keeping
the
building
form
is
important,
but
motion
carries
and
was
it
the
design
review.
E
Call
your
next
two
cases
calling
voa
868,
870
810
canterbury
streets,
it's
companion
case,
boa
868,
875,
812
canterbury
street.
This
is
for
810
there's
plenty
to
erect
a
two
family
home
on
six
thousand.
Two
hundred
eight
square
foot
lot:
the
violations-
article
67
section,
eight,
the
two
family
detached
dwelling
unit-
is
forbidden,
use
article
67,
section,
nine,
the
minimum
lot
width
requirements,
insufficient
article
67,
section,
nine,
the
minimum
lot
frontage
is
insufficient.
Article
67
section
9
in
the
minimum
usable
open
space
per
unit
is
insufficient.
E
Article
67,
section
9,
the
front
yard
setback
is
insufficient
and
article
6769,
the
side
yard,
is
insufficient.
This
is
for
812
canterbury,
subdividing
812
canterbury
street
into
two
lots
lot.
One
will
have
7
318
square
feet
lot:
2
will
have
6
028
square
feet,
the
house
at
8,
12
will
stay
and
the
new
house
will
be
built
at
8,
10
canterbury,
the
violation,
article
67
section
9.
What
width
is
insufficient
article
6769
lot?
Frontage
is
insufficient.
AO
AO
Tell
us
what's
being
proposed,
I'm
looking
to
divide
my
lot
and
build
a
two
two
family,
the
original
plan.
It
was
my
grandfather's
house.
I
was
gonna,
buy
the
lot
off
him
and
build
a
two
family
for
my
sister
and
I
we
started
going
through
the
pro
and
he
was
gonna
live
in
812..
AO
We
started
the
process
he
passed
away.
There
was
a
whole
thing,
you
know
with
probate
and
stuff.
I
end
up
getting
the
house
cove,
it
happened.
We
still
want
to
go
through
with
the
plans.
AO
Just
build
a
two
two
family
house
and
there's
a
there's,
a
garage
right
now
on
the
plans
you
can
see
of
the
subdividing
that
that
creates
like
a
pork
chop
lot.
Now
that
I
have
access,
I
have
the
surveyor
we're
going
to
just
make
it
a
straight
line.
So
lot
one
will
be
like
7
000
square
feet
and
lot
2
will
be
six
thousand
three
hundred
we're
gonna
make
we're
gonna
fix
the
the
violations
a
little
bit
better.
A
Okay,
so
so
this
district
is
a
one
f,
six
thousand
so
you're
proposing
the
the
second
house
so
tell
us
about
the
second
house,
the
one
at
810
canterbury
street.
So
it's
a
two
family
any
occupancy
in
the
basement.
A
A
Okay,
let's
just
see
how
are
the
plans,
mr
robinson.
K
Plans
are
pretty
straightforward.
No
no
question.
I
guess
my
only
question
is
hearing
the
proponent.
If
he's
going
to
change
the
lot
dimensions,
does
that
matter
to
us?
I
mean
I
think
in
terms
of
weighing
in
where
we
are
now.
A
Yes,
you
know
we
usually
care
about
that,
but
it
seems
that
this
is
a
one
of
6
000
and
we
very
much
think
that
we
that
we're
not
creating
serious
deficits
for
the
existing
building.
Okay,.
K
AP
K
That,
in
terms
of
the
proposed
project,.
A
AQ
AR
Yes,
madam
chair
dustin
from
counselor
world's
office,
we
have
no
no
reason
to
oppose
this
project.
A
E
Follow
me
next
case
calling
boa
one
two
one:
two:
seven:
five:
zero
seven,
fifty
hybrid
avenue
this
is
a
raised.
10
foot,
razor
roof,
10
feet,
install
underground
sewage,
demo,
the
interior,
yes,
and
plan
to
convert
to
a
car
wash
violation.
Article
67
section
8
uses
conditional
article
67
section
9.,
it's
fishing
sideways
setback.
E
AS
A
clyde,
nesbit,
750
high
part
cap,
the
current
owner,
basically
there's
plenty
of
space
behind
the
property
just.
AS
So
it's
current:
it's
currently
a
mechanic
shop.
It
also
has
a
bay
door
at
the
rear
of
the
building
where
you
already
drive
to
the
rear
of
the
building
already,
which
is
the
left
side.
That's
already
that's
already
current,
so
the
only
thing
that
we
have
is
about
35
feet
left
at
the
back
of
the
building.
So
there's
plenty
of
space
to
drive
behind
the
building.
AS
The
whole
build
is
just
going
to
be
a
touchless
car
wash
no
driving
the
car
would
just
drive
into
one
place
up
in
the
car
wash
and
keep
would
be
the
rest.
They
would
just
go
around
the
car
wash
the
vehicles
and
then
the
vehicles
would
exit
through
the
front
of
the
building.
A
AR
AS
We're
gonna
remove
the
auto,
the
automotive
and
the
towing,
and
it's
just
gonna,
be
a
car
wash.
A
Okay,
and
so
this
is
a
one
f,
six
thousand,
so
it's
a
residential
district.
Can
you
tell
us
how
this
would
fit
in
with
the
neighbors
around
you.
AS
I
feel
like
it
would
be
a
great
addition
to
the
neighborhood
since
there's
already
so
many
mechanic
shops
in
the
area,
including
one
across
the
street
and
which
we
own
as
well.
We
plan
on
adding
a
dog
hogwash
to
help
neighborhoods,
so
there's
plenty
of
people
that
walk
the
dogs
and
everything
so
they'll
be
able
to
come
and
get
the
room.
Their
dogs
personally
it'll
also
give
jobs
to
the
neighborhood.
No.
A
AS
We
had
a
meeting
with
them,
they
were,
they
seemed
to
be
okay
with
the
property.
With
the
whole
idea.
Our
butters
behind
us
were
a
complete
hundred
percent
behind
the
idea
of
having
a
car
wash
there.
We
have
a
new
neighbor
next
door
that
his
only
opposition
was
the
snow
removal,
but
we
told
we
were
helping
with
that
and
that's.
A
AS
A
Okay
and
then
tell
us
about
the
cueing,
because
we
approved
a
project
on
bluehill
for
a
car
wash
where
they
maintained.
There
was
no
cueing
and
there
was
no
queuing
on
the
street.
But
subsequent
to
that,
I
did
notice
that
there's
actually
quite
a
long
line
on
bluehill
and
then
and
then
we've
had
the
issue
with
the
car
wash
on
an
american
legion.
So
can
you
tell
us
how
you're
going
to
prevent
queuing
on
the
street.
AS
AS
So
on
the
750
property
we
could
have
upwards
of
about
10
to
12
cars
on
the
749
side,
where
we
plan
to
add
the.
A
Okay,
will
the
will
the
club
cut
be
reduced
in
any
way.
AS
A
No,
so
so
it
will
continue
not
to
be
accessible
to
pedestrians.
What
are
your
proposed
hours
of
operation.
AS
A
Okay,
let
me
just
see
how
are
the
plans,
mr
robinson.
K
I
mean,
I
guess
I
would
say
the
general
plan
is
fine
in
terms
of
the
building,
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
questions
about
the
site
plan
and
the
access
plan.
There
is
a
very
large
curb
cut
now
in
place.
However,
it
looks
like
they're
going
to
have
to
increase
it,
the
entire
width
of
the
property
to
make
it
work.
So
I
think
it's
going
to
exacerbate
the
issue
and
it
does
a
butt
to
residential
edges.
K
So
I
feel
like
we
need
a
little
bit
more
information
on
how
this
proposal
is
actually
going
to
fit
in.
C
So
just
I
know
there's
a
couple:
different
car
washes
and-
and
now
I'm
going
to
get
too
technical,
but
the
automated
one
is
that
do
the
cars
continuously
move,
or
is
it
one
of
these
ones?
You
pull
in
and
the
machine
does
all
the
work
around
you
and
then,
when
you're
done
so
only
one
car
can
be
in
at
a
time.
Yes,
okay
and
there's
only
one
of
those
and
the
other.
Two.
C
K
Just
mr
jared,
the
other
two
bays
are
called
self
wash
bays
per
the
plant.
Just
so
you
know
they're
not.
C
AS
AS
The
drying
is
going
to
take,
I'm
sorry,
the
dry's
gonna,
the
dryer's
gonna
take
place
in
the
base
themselves.
There
may
be
one
or
two
vacuum
cleaners
outside
but
like
we
were
saying,
there's
not
going
to
be
any
curb
cutting.
Did
they
have
the
line
placed
actually
incorrect,
we're
going
to
leave
the
curve
as
it
sits
because
there's
ample
space
there,
but
we
currently
use
as
a
tow
yard.
So
it's
going
to
be
the
same
exact
kind
of
design.
A
Okay,
any
other
questions
from
the
board.
A
A
Yes,
yeah.
AS
AS
A
Okay,
I
don't
know
why
this.
AT
AT
AS
A
You're
going
to
be
open
pretty
late
until
10,
are
you
going
to?
How
are
you
proposing
to
protect
them
from
getting
car
lights
and
then
in
their
bedrooms,
or
things
like
that?.
AS
So
we
plan
on
putting
up
a
wall.
Those
hours
aren't
completely
set.
Yet
we
want
to
make
sure
the
neighborhood's
okay
with
those
hours
we're
willing
to
work
with
those
eyes.
When
we
come
to
the
neighborhood,
that's
not
an
issue,
but
we
plan
on
doing
building
a
wall
around
the
property
to
buffer
the
sound
and
the
lights.
AS
It's
not
gonna.
We're
not
gonna,
allow
any
loader
in
it's
just
you
come
watch
your
car.
You
leave
after
you,
you're
done.
A
Okay,
so
this
is,
let
me
just
see
this:
is
I
don't?
It's
called
an
extension
of
a
non-conforming
use
and
a
change,
so
it's
a
conditional
use.
So
therefore
we
can
put
a
bunch
of
conditions
on
this.
Should
we
decide
to
approve
this?
Okay,
so
is
anybody
here
to
speak
either
in
support
or
in
opposition
of
this
proposal?.
AU
Good
morning,
madam
chair,
this
is
danielle
fonseca
with
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services
and
a
butters
meeting
was
hosted
by
our
office
on
october
21st
and
during
this
meeting,
many
abutters,
both
residents
and
business
owners,
did
have
concerns
regarding
the
impact
on
traffic
parking
noise.
There
were
some
environmental
concerns
in
terms
of
the
safety
and
impact
of
chemical
waste,
the
hours
of
operation
that
are
being
proposed
and
pedestrian
safety.
AU
AU
Regarding
this
proposal,
there
was
some
confusion:
whether
the
applicants
directly
spoke
with
the
president
of
the
association
and
whether
there
was
a
plan
to
present
at
the
meeting,
but
the
high
park.
Neighborhood
association
has
stated
that
they
do
have
concerns
for
this
project
and
believe
that
they
are
seeking
too
many
variances
and
again
outgoing
concerns
for
traffic.
This
project
is
close
to
roslyndale,
so
they
tried
to
connect
with
the
claire
avenue
community
group,
but
there
was
no
response
due
to
the
inactivity
with
that
group.
AU
O
And
manager,
do
you
have
a
few
raised
hands
I'll
start
with
kay
allen?
Can
you
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
breakfast
good.
AV
Morning
my
name
is
m
allen.
I
live
at
110,
claire
avenue
and
I'm
in
a
butter.
I
am
concerned
about
the
size
and
the
of
the
project
in
the
underground
storage.
I
think
this
kind
of
business
will
add
traffic
noise
and
air
pollution
on
hyde
park,
ave,
which
is
already
a
busy
thoroughfare.
The
hours
are
not
conducive.
I
do
appreciate
the
owners
willingness
to
be
amenable
to
the
neighborhood,
but
I
just
don't
think
this
is
the
right
project
for
this
street.
Thank
you.
Thanks.
O
All
right
and
mundo,
you
have
sent
a
request
on
you.
Can
you
state
your
full
name
and
address
for
the
record?
Please.
H
Yes,
my
name
is
mundo
762,
hyper
covenew.
I
just
want
to
share
with
you
that
we
more
than
20
neighbors
that
never
come.
Where
I
contacted
we
had
never
met
with
anyone.
No
one
had
never
told
us
that
was
going
to
be
an
establishment
car
wash
numbers
that
we
had
never
met
with
anyone.
We
are
opposed
more
than
20
neighbors.
We
wrote
the
letter
we
signed.
We
are
opposed
to
the
car
wash.
We
are
next
today
at
7
50
high
park
avenue.
H
O
AW
Actually
it's
peter
from
arrow
autobody.
For
some
reason,
I
was
knocked
off
the
zoom
meeting,
so
I
I'm
actually
on
my
co-workers,
computer
right
now.
We
are
we're
in
opposition
of
this
all
together,
we're
very
concerned
and.
AW
752
hyde
park
avenue
and
we're
actually
right
next
door
to
the
establishment.
I
actually
own
the
two
family
next
door
to
the
body
shop
and
you
know
our
concerns.
I
think
it's
a
real
bad
idea
on
our
end.
Anyways
thank.
A
Anybody
from
the
city
counselor's
office,
okay,
may
I
have
a
motion
please.
G
I'm
going
to
make
a
motion
to
defer.
It
sounds
like
there
hasn't
been
a
process
where
the
neighborhood
sounds
like
the
owner
may
be
amenable
to
making
some
accommodations
and
changes,
but
unless
that
conversation
happens
first
before
it
comes
to
us,
I
don't
think
we
should
act
on
it.
So
I'm
making
a
motion
to
defer.
A
I
guess
I
guess
my
bottom
line
question
is:
should
it
fit
in,
you
know,
you
know,
given
the
testimony
about
all
the
the
the
impacts
but
but
sure
there's
a
motion
on
it
on
the
table.
That
has
happened
all
those
in
favor.
AX
A
May
24th
at
11
30
for
everybody
who
is
on
this
call.
E
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
It's
now
10
37,
I'm
going
to
call
the
10
30
cases
for
any
deferrals
or
withdrawals.
If
you
give
me
the
address
first,
please
this
is
for
10
30.
Only
referrals
are
withdrawal.
A
E
I
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board
mark
lucas,
lacasse
law,
75
arlington
street
in
boston
attorney
for
the
applicant,
the
saint
george
albanian
orthodox
cathedral,
requesting
deferral
to
complete
our
process
of
reviewing
stormwater
management.
With
our
engineer
and
the
abutters
regarding.
AY
AG
E
E
AZ
Good
morning,
madam
chair
and
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
mark
sanjolo,
I'm
the
architect
for
the
project
with
me
on
line
is
the
owner,
developer,
kate,
earls
and
also
the
landscape
architect,
susan
sanjolo.
AZ
This
drawing
here
t1
shows
the
building
on
the
footprint
in
relation
to
the
the
site
and
the
surrounding
buildings,
although
it
is
the
classic
pork
chop
lot
with
25
feet
of
frontage
on
every
street,
we
do
have
80
feet
of
frontage
on
the
gordon
street
side,
which
is
a
public
park,
and
we
overlook
we're
high
above
the
t.
So
it's
not
like
the
site
is
constrained
around
it.
If
you
go
to
t2.
AZ
AZ
Sure
we
ended
up
with
number
seven
after
an
extensive,
a
community,
a
neighborhood
review.
The
neighbors
were
completely
involved
in
the
design
of
this
project.
They
decided
where
the
building
would
be
sited.
How
many
units
would
be
it
would
be
what
the
building
type
would
be.
We
had
wanted
to
do.
Townhouses
they
wanted
to
do
flats.
We
had
no
problem
with
relinquishing
control
of
the
design
to
them
as
long.
A
AZ
So,
as
you
can
see
on
this
plan
l1,
this
is
the
landscape
plan
to
the
left
is
everett
street.
There
has
a
driveway
that
goes
down.
It's
a
shared
driveway
between
eight
everett
on
the
left,
which
is
a
project
we
did
two
years
ago.
It's
a
three
three
unit
building
and
then,
as
we
go,
you
can
see
our
building
that
is
entered
from
below,
there's
also
a
walk
along
the
right,
the
bottom
property
line
that
goes
along
the
lot
line
and
into
the
into
the
building.
AZ
If
you
go
to
a1,
I
think
it'll
show
how
the
parking
works
a
little
better.
It's
down,
yep
back
up
back
up.
BA
AZ
It's
right
there
yep
this
a1
color
drawing,
so
you
can
see
the
driveway
and
how
the
parking
works
on
the
site.
The
parking
is
lower
than
the
driveway
goes
down
lower
and
the
the
entry
is
on
a
split
level,
half
level
above
we
did
try
to
minimize
the
the
garage
garages.
There's
only
three
three
parking
spaces.
We
did
try
to
minimize
the
garages
by
pushing
the
one
garage
back
to
reduce
the
massing.
AZ
A
So
how
are
the
plans,
mr
robinson.
A
Any
questions
any
questions
from
the
board,
so
you're
a
butter
at
what
is
it
14?
Has
their
car
park
tilted
right
towards
your
your
your
walkway?
A
AN
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
tiffany
caballero
here
from
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services
in
a
butters
meeting,
was
facilitated
by
my
office
back
on
september
27
2021.
I
possessed
28
letters
from
director
butters
in
non-opposition
of
this
project.
Additionally,
the
jp
c
zoning
subcommittee
voice
support
of
this
proposal
as
well
on
february
2nd
2022.
At
this
time,
the
mayor's
office
would
like
to
defer
to
the
board's
judgment.
Thank
you.
O
A
It's
david
okay,
david
connicken.
BB
BB
It
covers
items
that
are
not
necessarily
on
the
building
plan
or
the
landscape
plan,
but
the
developers
have
agreed
to
adhere
to
it
going
forward.
I'd
appreciate
if
the
board
could
recognize
the
memo
of
understanding
as
part
of
of
of
of
the
approval
process,
if
indeed
you
do
approve
this
project
this
morning
and
the
28
names
on
the
memo
of
under
a
memo
of
understanding
do
support.
You
know
the
granting
of
the
unfair.
A
O
No
ma'am,
I
try
to
go
back
to
belinda.
It
looks
like
there's
still
issues
getting
her
on,
so
I
have
no
additional
ways
yet.
E
You're
calling
the
last
case
for
for
9
30
calling
voa
125
0
2,
9,
8,
9,
0,
nine,
sorry
116
to
126
harvard
avenue.
E
E
This
is
a
change
of
change
of
occupancy
from
an
existing
retail
space
into
a
cannabis
dispensary
with
recreational
use,
the
violations,
article
51,
section,
16,
the
use
and
regulations
the
location,
the
bitten
buffer
zone
conflict
proposed
within
2
640
feet
of
another
cannabis
establishment,
article
51,
section,
16,
use
and
regulations,
canvas
established.
Recreational
uses
conditional
aiming
address
for
the
record.
Please.
A
So
talk
to
us
about
what
you're
proposing
you
may
have
been
on
some
of
our
other
calls.
So
please
tell
us
about
how
your
your
operation
is
proposed
to
work
any
parking
that
you're
proposing
and
how
far
away
you
are
from.
Another
establishment
tell
us
why
the
community
needs
to
within
the
half
mile.
BD
Yes,
good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
and
thank
you
for
this
opportunity
to
present
our
proposal
this
morning
to
you
for
an
adult
use,
dispensary
located
at
116
harvard
app.
Yes,
the
answer
your
question.
Specifically,
we
will
operate
out
of
2
000
square
foot
street
level,
retail
space
on
harford
avenue.
BD
It
is
a
commercial
district.
Yes,
there
are
no
direct
residential
butters
to
us.
We
are
an
economic
empowerment
and
social
equity
applicant,
we're
independent
local
and
a
minority
owned
business,
and
we
plan
to
make
a
positive
impact
to
the
community
through
several
initiatives
which
we
will
discuss
with
you.
BD
So
yes,
the
buffer
zone
issue
on
the
map
to
have
it
designates
and
shows
that
our
where
our
location
is
versus
the
the
location
that
we
are
within
their
buffer
zone,
mayflower
medicinals
further
down
harvard
avenue,
as
indicated
in
the
circles,
the
cvs
that
are
that
are
indicated
there
almost
desert
that
basically
we
serve
two
different
markets
within
the
neighborhood.
A
BD
Yes,
so
we
are
0.3
miles
away
from
mayflower
distance
and
we
started
this
process
made
from
our
medicinals
was
a
medic
only
operator,
and
they
currently
are
only
serving
medical
patients.
Only
with
that
with
the
fact
that
we
have
a
natural
buffer
in
calm
math
in
the
green
line
between
us,
the
fact
that
we're
commercially
zoned
the
fact
that
the
density
within
all
is
50
higher
than
the
city-wide
average
density
is.
BD
We
feel
that
we
can
the
the
austin
area
special
porter
can
support
two
dispensaries
within
the
location,
mayflower
mayflowers
medicinal
is
right
on
border
of
brookline
and
austin,
and
so
we
feel
that
we
will
serve
a
different,
a
different
customer,
specifically
being
recreational
as
well
as
the
distance
between
us,
the
natural
buffer
and
no.
A
So
please
tell
us
about
your
facility,
your
hours
of
operation,
how
much
of
it
will
be
just
pick
up
how
you'll
deal
with
queuing.
BD
Right
so
our
facility,
our
location,
is
again
this
two
thousand
square
feet
retail
space
level.
One
of
the
things
that
we're
going
to
do
with
the
location
is
we're
going
to
add
a
separate
entrance
to
the
right
of
the
building
to
help
a
customer
flow.
Once
you
enter
into
the
building,
you
go
through
the
required
security
checks,
one
on
the
outside
one
on
the
inside,
with
through
the
states
scanner
and
then
one
at
the
point
of
sale
immediately
entering
the
facility.
We
have
designated
about
five
thousand
square
feet
of
space.
BD
If
you
look
at
the
diagram
to
the
right,
it's
kind
of
like
a
horseshoe
one
of
our
impacts
that
we're
making
with
the
community
is
to
use
this
space
as
indoor
queuing,
and
it
will
double
also
as
a
indoor
gallery
rotating
gallery,
where
we
allow
austin
residents
to
exhibit
and
monitor
their
artwork
artists
in.
A
So
so
please
tell
us
then,
about
deliveries.
How
and
when
will
deliveries
occur.
BD
Yes,
deliveries
and
cash
transfers
will
occur
to
the
rear
of
the
building.
We
have
a
separate
loading
area
to
the
rear
of
the
building.
BD
Those
those
deliveries
will
be
discrete
and
unmarked
vehicles
and
they
will
be
randomized
in
their
delivery,
and
we
will
you
know
we
will
have
on-site
security
as
well
as
cameras
throughout
the
facility
in
the
interior
and
the
exterior
to
to
security
with
our
site
and
with
the
area
as
in
the
general
business
areas.
A
Okay,
and
will
you
be
proposing
to
use
the
basement
at
all,
or
is
it
all
on
this
level.
BD
The
basement
will
be
used
as
a
break
room
for
associates
who
have
two
bathrooms
in
there
and
on
one
side
of
the
basement,
we'll
use
for
office
space.
BD
All
will
be
on
the
street
level.
Yes,.
A
Okay
and
what
are
your
proposed
hours
of
operation.
K
A
Mr
lawrence,
did
you
tell
us
about
how
much
of
yourself
do
you
anticipate
happening
as
just
pickups
or
online.
BD
So
online
ordering
we
will
have
pre-ordering
and
online
for
express
pickup.
We
anticipate
maybe
between
30
and
40
of
that
would
be
online,
which
will
help
with
the
customer
flow,
eliminate
lines
on
the
exterior
of
the
building
and
just
kind
of
expedite
the
expedite
the
process
of
getting
customers
in
and
out.
BD
We
are
working
also
with
the
city
of
boston
parking
department,
we'd
like
to
institute
a
15-minute
parking
area
zone
within
the
the
business
district.
We
feel
that
it
will
help
not
only
with
our
business,
but
the
many
restaurants
that
you
utilize,
grub,
club
and
uber
eats
that
come
in
and
out
of
facility
only
need
about
15
minutes
of
which
to
do
so.
Our
transaction,
we
estimate,
will
be
about
no
more
ten
minutes
for
a
customer
to
come
in,
purchase
their
product
and
leave
the
building.
A
And
so
a
general
a
general
cannabis
establishment
such
as
yours
is
also
allowed
to
sell
medical
marijuana
is.
Am
I
right
about
that?.
BD
Meaning
that
we
would
grow
our
own
product,
you
have
to
grow
your
own
product
in
order
to
be
a
medicinal
operator,
so
we
would
not
compete
with
mayflower
medicinals.
V
BE
Yes,
madam
chairman
who's,
the
board
conor
newman
with
the
mayor's
office
neighborhood
services.
At
this
time,
the
mayor's
office
referred
judgment
to
the
board,
some
background
information
on
the
community
process.
The
applicant
has
met
and
presented
to
both
the
brighton,
austin
improvement
association
and
the
austin
civic
association
during
those
presentations.
A
number
of
members
expressed
support
of
the
location
feeling
it
was
appropriate
being
in
a
business
district,
that's
zoned
for
community
commercial.
BE
There
should
be
a
letter
that
also
came
in
from
the
austin
civic
association
regarding
concerns
about
the
buffer
zone
conflict,
which
is
the
number
of
marijuana
establishments
already
approved
in
the
austin
in
the
austin
area.
Excuse
me,
the
mayor's
office
had
a
public
meeting
on
december
29th
in
2021
overwhelmingly
the
residents
that
attended
the
business
owners
that
attended
were
in
support.
BE
They
liked
that
the
applicant
had
done
a
good
job
reaching
out
to
them
and
liked
the
commitments
to
equity
and
supporting
local
artists.
I
believe
the
austin
village
main
street
organization
has
also
submitted
a
letter
of
support,
as
he
has
also
submitted
a
letter
of
support
to
another
rival
cannabis
dispensary
in
the
area
as
well.
Thank
you.
A
Okay,
I
would
like
anybody
to
who
is
anticipating
giving
testimony
I'd
like
to
have
austin
brighton
residents,
not
residents
from
other
parts
of
the
city
or
other
cities.
Okay,
volunteer.
O
BF
BF
Yeah,
my
name
is
alexander
shames.
I
live
at
49
cushman
road
in
brighton.
I
want
to
speak
in
strong
support
of
mass
greenwood's
116,
harvard
ave.
BF
BG
Hi,
my
name
is
nick
grieco,
I'm
a
austin
resident
at
64,
ridgemont
street
apartment
number,
one,
I'm
a
founding
member
of
artist
impact,
and
I
would
like
to
just
say
that
I'm
in
strong
support
of
this
establishment,
I
think
that
their
programs
for
social
equity
and
housing
assistance
for
their
staff
and
artist
resources
is
unrivaled
in
the
neighborhood
and.
BH
Hello,
yes,
my
name
is
joshua
sullivan,
I'm
from
160
cambridge
street.
I've
lived
in
austin
all
my
life,
maybe
five
generations,
and
I'm
also
disabled,
and
that
would
be
real,
nice
and
and
awesome
that
there
would
be
a
nice
dispensary
local
close
to
my
home,
where
I
could
just
ride
my
wheelchair
in
and
thank.
O
O
BI
Hi
hi,
my
name
is
dwan
pagnet.
I
live
in
brighton
fortress
wick
road,
I'm
number
43
and
I
am
in
strong
support
of
this
application
and
this
team.
I
think
it
will
be
a
great
addition
to
the
austin
bright
neighborhood.
Thank.
O
You
all
right,
tony
this
adorable
been
sent
a
request
to
unmute
you,
okay,
go
ahead.
BJ
BJ
Not
so
much
directed
at
the
opponents,
but
we
wanted
to
bring
to
your
attention
the
the
item
that
you
brought
up
earlier.
We
actually
have
four
dispensaries
in
various
stages
of
the
review:
approval
process.
259
cambridge
street
116,
harvard
ave,
144,
harvard
half
and
230
harvard
have
all
four
of
them
are
within
a
mile
of
each
other.
Three
of
the
four
on
harvard
ave,
of
course,
are
within
the
half
mile
buffer.
So
we
just
wanted
to
through
the
statement
of
non-opposition
deferring
judgment
to
the
board.
BJ
We
just
wanted
to
bring
to
the
attention
of
the
board
what
is
in
the
pipeline
and
what
conceivably
could
come
to
the
zoning
board
for
deals
in
the
future.
BJ
Gee,
I'm
not
sure,
madam
chair,
the
the
the
250,
the
259
cambridge,
as
you
know,
was
approved
both
by
the
cannabis
board
and
by
the
zba.
116,
of
course,
is
here
today.
144
was
in
front
of
the
cannabis
board
and
they
decided
to
defer,
because
there
was
some
questions
about
the
community
review
process
and
they
needed
to
schedule
another
community
meeting.
And
then,
as
you
know,
one
230
harvard
ave
is
a
medical.
It's
the
only
one
who
have
an
operating
medical
dispensary.
BJ
They
have
also
been
approved
by
the
cannabis
board
and
the
cba
for
a
recreational
license
as
well.
So
again,
we
just
wanted
to
bring
to
your
attention
the
fact
that
there's
really
four
proposals
that
we
know
of
that
are
actively
in
pursuit
of
getting
a
license
granted
to
them.
O
Thanks
and
kimberly
tutter,
you
said
your
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
R
Yes,
this
is
kimberly
hutter,
I'm
from
senator
brown's
burger's
office.
I
wanted
to
come
today
to
offer
the
standard
the
senator's
standard,
responsive
non-opposition,
to
this
proposal
and
defer
to
the
judgment
of
the
board,
but
also
state
that
the
senator
does
have
a
blanket
policy
of
supporting
applications
for
campus
business
in
the
area.
Thank
you.
BK
All
right,
thank
you.
My
name
is
nirvik
de
jesus.
I
live
at
101
etna
street
in
brighton
and
I
just
wanted
to
speak
in
support
of
the
opening
of
the
dispensary
and
also
the
the
gallery.
That'll
be
a
part
of
it.
I
think
it's
gonna
be
really
good
for
the
community
in
terms
of
bringing
art
from
the
residents
out
into
the
streets,
so
to
speak.
Austin
is
a
very
art,
rich
environment
to
be
in
I'm
a
local
artist
myself
and
it's
always
nice
to
see.
BL
A
O
Young
juice,
one
second,
okay,
yep,
can
you
say
your
fault
name
and
address
for
the
record?
Please.
BM
BM
BN
BN
A
Okay,
so
we
have
you
know
the
perennial
issue,
or
maybe
it's
the
weekly
issue,
to
two
operators
within
proximity
of
each
other
and
tony
is
right.
We
did
approve
230
as
a
switch
from
purely
medical
when
they
started
off
to
a
general,
and
so
given
that
this
is
an
equity
applicant,
I
don't
know
if
that
changes
the
the
decision,
because
you
know
this
is
an
intense
number
of
for
such
a
small
area.
A
G
Before
we
entertain
a
motion,
can
I
just
ask
a
question:
if
we're
dealing
with
this
buffer
zone
issue
and
making
exceptions,
presumably
the
cannabis
board
has
weighed
in
on
this.
Do
we
know
what
their
rationale
was
in
favor.
A
AA
A
A
A
Oh,
that's.
That
is
true
because
the
the
mean
is
conditional,
that's
right
so
so
this
is
a
conditional
use
forbidden
because
it's
within
the
within
the
half
a
mile.
So
so,
given
that
information
may
have
a
motion,
please.
C
I
I
I'll
make
a
motion
to
approve
with
bpda
design
review
and
similarly
the
windows
trying
to
keep
them
open
and
transparent
as
possible.
I
know
there's
the
regulation
because
they
have
to
follow
but
design
review
for
that
and
signage.
E
A
A
Let
us
resume
the
meeting
for
march
22nd
for
the
zoning
vote
of
appeal.
Just
before
we
kick
off.
Let
me
remind
everybody
that
this
is
a
six
member
board
and
that
you
need
five
approvals
of
five
positive
votes
for
your
project
to
be
approved.
A
You
are
thus-
and
you
know
you-
you-
don't
thus
have
the
option
to
require
to
request
an
administrative
deferral.
Sorry
about
all
that
stumbling,
but
go
ahead.
Mr
fortune.
E
E
Hearing
none
madam
chair
call
the
first
case
at
10
30
calling
doa
125
2505
166
to
168
salem
street.
This
is
a
change
of
lock
from
an
eight
unit,
residential
one
store
to
a
nine
unit,
residential
dwelling
and
extend
living
space
into
the
basement
and
construct
new
rear
decks
for
violations.
Article
54
section
10,
the
flooding
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
54,
section
21,
our
street
parking
is
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
BO
Sure
so
we
have
a
existing
five-story
nine
unit
building
which
we
are
proposing
to
change
from
eight
units
and
a
club.
The
ground
floor
was
a
club
that
hasn't
been
used
in
in
some
time,
so
we're
proposing
to
change
it
from
eight
eight
units
in
a
club
to
nine
residential.
BO
We're.
Also
that
that's
where
our
violation
comes
from
for
austria
parking.
We
don't
have
a
parking
spot
to
provide
for
the
additional
residential
unit.
A
So
first
tell
us:
has
this
address
been
before
this
board
before
for
the
residential
use.
A
So
tell
us
about
that
first
floor
unit
and
tell
us
how
what
the
proposed
square
footage
is,
and
just
so
that
you
know
this
board
is
not
overly
thrilled
about
residential
use
in
the
basement.
So
talk
us
through
that.
Please.
BO
Sure
yeah,
so
we
have
the
way
the
building
was
was
stacked.
Previously
was
two
units
per
floor,
so
we
we,
when
we
extended
the
living
space
at
the
basement,
we
made
two
duplexes.
BO
Originally
we
were
going
to
have
the
bedrooms
down
here
in
the
basement,
but
you
know
it
wasn't
it
wasn't
the
best
space
for
them,
so
we
ended
up
just
doing
all
living
space
down
there.
There's
a
you
know
pretty
decent
ceiling.
I
we
have
a
good
amount.
A
Of
windows,
very
specifically,
what
is
the
flow
to
ceiling
height
in
the
basement
hold
on
hold
on?
What
is
the
proposed
square
feet
for
each
of
those
each
of
those
two
units
and
what
is
their
second
means
of
egress?
And
finally,
are
the
meters
accessible
independently
from
the
units.
BO
Yes,
they
are
so
the
the
the
units
are
about
900
square
feet.
These
duplexes
here
there
are
the
buildings
fully
sprinkled.
So
for
these
first
floor
units
we
didn't
have
the
same
problem
as
we
had
for
the
for
the
fifth
floor
unit.
We
needed
a
second
beautiful,
which
is
where
we
have
a
staircase
coming
all
the
way
back
down
for
these.
We
do
have
window
wells
in
them,
but
those
are
just
kind
of
additional
egresses
for
them
and
then
all
the
other.
BO
Sure
so
the
floor
ceiling
height
will
be
eight
feet
when
it's
complete
seven
seven
foot
eleven.
K
Plans
are,
are
fine,
is
there
a?
Is
there
a
plot
plan
or
a
survey?
I
just
don't
know
what
the
rear
yard
encroachment
of
the
additional
decks
is
and
just
for
the
board,
the
living
space
appears
to
be
in
the
basement
is
wholly
below
grade.
I
think
there's
looks
to
be
some
small
windows
and
some
area
wells
in
the
back,
but
there
is
no
bedroom
called
out.
It's
called
out
as
an
office.
AF
AP
K
Yes,
as
you
can
see
in
this
plan,
this
elevation
on
the
current
screen
the
right
hand
side
shows
the
dashing
of
the
new
basement
level,
which
is
minus
nine
foot.
Four.
It
says
which
I
assume
the
reason
it's
a
eight
foot
ceiling
is
because
it's
there's
structure
there,
of
course,
so
there
are
small
windows
on
the
left
hand
side,
as
you
can
see
in
the
front
below
that
appear
to
be
the
only
actual
windows
into
the
basement.
Besides
the
rear
area
wells.
A
Okay,
any
questions
from
the
board.
V
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
I'm
sierra
tamiko,
with
mayor's
office
of
network
services,
they
had
complete
their
community
process.
However,
a
butter
voice
concerns
about
the
rear
decks
because
they
believed
bring
more
noise
and
disturbance
to
the
neighborhood.
Although
there
were
two
letters
of
support
from
north
end,
waterfront
residents,
association
and
the
north.
BQ
O
If
not,
I
have
no
additional
raised
hands,
I'm
not
sure
about
this
hi
bob.
Can
you
hear
it
yeah,
okay,.
K
I
would
I
would,
I
would
entertain
a
motion
or
make
a
motion
to
defer
as
well
without
having
the
a
plot
plan.
I
just
don't
understand
how
close
the
decks
are
to
the
rear.
It's
fairly
tight
in
the
rear.
AI
A
A
BR
My
lawyer,
actually
adam
baronski,
should
be
online.
I
mean
I
if
it's
not
there,
I
can
present
it
hi
good
morning.
Can
you
hear
me.
D
Here
he
is
okay,
oh
hi,
sorry
about
that.
Hey
good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
adam
barnowski,
255,
state
street
boston
with
me
is
marco
patrillo,
the
property
owner
and
the
architect
eduardo
serate
might
be
joining
us.
Although
he
did
a
conflict
around
11
o'clock,
the
property
is
located
within
the
south
end
neighborhood
district,
the
mfr
zoning
sub
district.
This
is
an
application
for
an
installation
of
a
roof
deck.
D
The
property
is
located
southeast
of
columbus
avenue
amidst
amidst
a
row
of
townhouses,
both
adjacent
to
and
across
the
street.
From
the
subject
property
unit,
5
is
located
on
the
fifth
floor,
with
exclusive
roof
rights,
as
the
plans
show,
the
access
to
the
roof
deck
as
proposed
is
through
an
existing
head
house,
the
rear
of
the
property
accessed
through
a
rear
stairway.
This
is
not
a
common
roof,
with
the
deck
being
exclusive
to
unit
5..
D
The
the
width
is,
seven
foot
two
inches
it's
on.
You
can
see.
You
can
see
it
on
on
a2
of
the
construction
plans.
G
G
K
Small
head
house,
mr
erlich,
I
think
it's
it's
not
dimensioned
in
plan,
it's
one
direction,
but
it
looks
like
about
seven
by
seven
ish,
okay,
but
it
and
it's
it's
at
the
back,
so
the
roof
slopes
down,
it's
barely
minimal
got
it.
W
Yes,
good
morning,
madam
chair
and
members
of
the
board
kim
crusoe
with
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services
office,
held
in
the
butters
meeting
in
february
of
2022,
where
a
sport
was
shown
by
the
abutters.
They
also
received
a
letter
of
support
from
the
claremont
neighborhood
association.
At
this
time,
our
office
would
like
to
defer
to
the
board.
Thank
you.
O
O
AY
A
G
G
A
BS
A
Hold
on:
let's
have
it
read
into
the
record,
just
at
least
the
the
number
and
the
address
and
then
we'll
take
it
there.
Thank.
E
BS
A
Any
opposed
motion
carries
this
is
because
there's
a
five
member
board,
and
so
this
is
an
administrative
deferral.
May
we
have
a
date,
please.
BS
April
26th
works,
mr
secretary.
E
Following
the
next
case,
calling
doa
127-0494,
460
east
7th
street,
this
ability
roof
deck,
building,
extended
existing
spiral
staircase
to
access
new
roof
deck
on
the
rear
of
the
building.
The
violations,
article
68,
section,
29,
roof
structure,
restrictions
accessed
by
a
spiral
steer,
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
BT
Hi,
my
name
is
gerald
adler.
I'm
the
owner
at
460,
east
7th
street
address,
is
28
monument
street
charlestown.
A
Style,
could
you
make
sure
we
can
see
you?
We
strongly
encourage
that.
So
please,
don't
please
go
ahead
and
describe
your
project.
BT
How
do
I
put
the,
how
do
I
activate
the
camera.
BT
I
apologize
for
that
in
any
event.
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
present
today
and
share
our
proposal
for
460
east
7th
street.
We
are
requesting
to
add
a
private
deck
for
the
third
floor
unit
to
be
located
on
the
roof.
BT
At
the
moment,
all
the
tenants
continue
to
work
from
home
and
lack
dedicated
outdoor
space
and
knowing
the
challenges
of
that
situation,
we're
looking
to
improve
the
living
condition
and
and
add
a
deck
which
is
detailed
on.
I
believe
the
next
page
of
the
plans
that
you
are
scrolling
through
at
the
moment.
BT
Not
quite
ma'am
the
the
intent
would
be
that
this
deck
would
be
for
the
exclusive
use
of
the
third
floor
presence.
Okay,.
A
Third
floor:
okay:
okay
and
how
is
it
accessed
it's
to
the
spiral
stairs
right.
BT
BT
There
actually
is
a
hatch.
Yes,
we
did
not
think
that
that
was.
That
is
certainly
an
option
that
we
could
we
could
explore.
We
thought
that
it
would
likely
be
easier
to
access
it
by
the
existing
spiral
stair
by
simply
extending
it,
but
there
is
a
hash
and
that
putting
a
putting
access
through
that
hatch
is
definitely
something
that
could
be
done
absolutely.
A
Okay,
when
was
this
building
constructed.
A
Okay
is
how
are
the
plans,
mr
robinson.
K
Plans
are
pretty
straightforward,
it
the
looks
like
the
existing
spiral.
Is
there
up
to
three
and
then
they're
just
proposing
to
extend
it
up
and
then
build
a
project.
AL
Hi,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board
haley
dillon
mayor's
office
neighborhood
services
at
the
abutters
meeting.
We
did
hear
a
lot
of
opposition
from
long-standing
owners
and
generational
stealthy
residents,
and
we
did
hear
a
few
support
from
a
couple
renters
down
the
street
and
any
of
the
supported
opposition.
Letters
were
sent
to
the
zoning
board,
but
we
would
like
to
defer
to
the
board.
Thank
you.
A
A
I'm
sorry
about
that,
because
you
just
have
a
great
history
with
the
community
and
put
things
in
context.
So
good
luck!
Oh.
E
Madam
chair
secretary,
here
we
have
one
letter
in
opposition.
O
X
No
problem
good
morning,
madam
hotel
members
of
the
war
anna
calderon
from
council
presidents
link's
office
counselor
would
like
to
win
an
opposition
based
on
people
from
about
neighbors
in
the
gate
of
heaven,
neighborhood
association,
who
will
express
significant
concerns
of
all
absentee
landlords
and
noise
disruption,
love
body,
satell
hours,
trash
removal
and
other
quality
of
life
issues.
These
concerns
have
been
significant
quality
of
life
issues
in
the
south
boston
community
for
years
and
have
unfortunately
exacerbated
it
to
a
much
higher
degree
over
the
last
couple
of
years
during
the
pandemic.
Thank
you
so
much.
AI
I'm
sure
members
of
the
board,
paul
sullivan
the
city
council
at
large,
michael
flaherty
council,
like
to
go
on
record
in
opposition
he'd,
also
like
to
suggest
that
the
board
put
a
moratorium
on
roof
deck
approvals
to
the
community,
working
with
the
appropriate
state
department,
c6
and
isd,
get
the
existing
roof
deck
parties
and
safety
issues
under
control.
Council
would
like
to
note
that
there
were
several
incidents
in
the
neighborhood
this
past
weekend
in
an
instance
where
one
person
actually
fell
off
a
roof
deck.
Thank
you.
O
O
BU
Yes,
there's
already
two
large
decks
on
the
back
of
that
house
and
there's
nothing
about
properties
and
noise
out
there
all
the
time.
One
of
the
decks
has
an
illegal
grill
on
there,
that's
covered
by
a
roof,
but
there's
been
nothing
but
trouble
with
this
landlord.
Since
he's
been
here,
he's
been
ticketed
by
the
city.
Doesn't
the
only
house
on
the
block
that
doesn't
shovel
the
sidewalks
anything
else?
You
know
it's
just
nothing
about
farms.
We
don't
need
them.
V
BV
Hi
I
would
like
to
voice
my
opposition.
I
grew
up
on
this
street
and
it
used
to
be
a
community
and
it
has
been
destroyed
by
absentee
landlords
and
non-stop
partying
hold
on.
BV
My
name
is
brydie
mcdonough.
I
live
at
456
east
7th
street
two
doors
off
so.
A
We
just
heard
from
somebody
in
your
household
right.
Yes,
okay,
thank
you
me.
Is
there
other
race
hands?
No,
no
man!
Okay,
may
I
have
a
motion.
Please.
A
There,
a
second
all
those
in
favor
any
opposed
motion
carries.
Mr
adler
sounds
like
there's
a
little
bit
of
woke.
You
need
to
do
to
be
a
good
neighbor,
so
please
see
what
you
can
do
with
with
your
butters.
Okay.
Thank
you.
E
E
E
AT
Good
morning,
mr
madam
chairman
of
the
board,
richard
lenz
245
summer
street
east
boston,
on
behalf
of
the
petitioner
madam
chair,
I
believe
you
only
have
a
six
member
board.
There
will
be
one
recusal
and
therefore
we
would
only
have
a
five
report
for
the
hearing
and
therefore
requesting
administrative
deferral.
A
AT
E
E
Q
E
Hearing
none
I'm
going
to
call
the
subcommittee
which
met
on
thursday
march
17
2022
at
1010
mass
ave
fifth
floor
along
the
first
case
case.
Boa
one
two,
four
one:
eight
seven,
nine
six
fifteen
east
third
street
was
an
existing
two
family
new
regress
stairs
in
the
regular
building.
It
was
approved
case
boa
one.
Two,
eight,
nine
four
five
four
four
cherokee
street
was
deferred
to
the
subcommittee
for
414
2022
at
5
pm,
ksboa
127,
7696,
41,
cornwall
street
construct
a
new
roof
dorm
and
extend
living
space
to
the
attic.
In
existing
two
film.
E
It
was
approved
ksboa
one,
two,
eight
one,
four,
nine,
nine
six
port
norfolk
street
was
a
gut
and
tear
of
a
home
and
reinforced
structure
raised
the
second
floor
of
the
code.
It
was
approved
with
bpda
for
dormer
and
roof
height
case
boa
127
7213
43
pair
screen
was
deferred
to
the
subcommittee
on
5
19
2022
at
5
pm
case
voa
129
0443
20
orchard
street
was
to
build
a
new,
build,
a
dormer
to
create
a
new
master
bathroom.
E
It
was
approved
with
bpda
for
dormer
case
boa
127
7380
11
danville
street
was
a
constructive
one-story
addition
to
the
rear
of
an
existing
single
family.
Detached
dwelling.
It
was
approved
hboa
one,
two:
eight,
zero,
zero,
eight
three
fifteen
gertrude
road
was
a
renovation
and
edition
of
unit
two,
an
existing
two
family
condo.
It
was
approved
case
boa
one,
two,
eight,
three:
six:
nine
six,
twelve
thirty
soldiers
field
road
to
build
a
fitness
center.
E
It
was
approved
and
on
the
rediscussion
it
was
case.
Boa
119,
4620,
33
butler
street
was
a
renovation
existing
third
floor.
Attic
renovated
space
consist
of
a
massive
bedroom
along
with
the
bath
and
guest
room.
It
was
approved
with
bpd
attention
to
the
raising
of
the
room.
That
concludes
the
subcommittee's
report
for
march
17.
2022.
AP
P
E
Calling
the
next
case
for
the
1030s
calling
voa
129
6104
135,
william
t
morrissey
boulevard.
This
is
a
change
of
arc
to
include
accessory
keeping
of
laboratory
animals.
The
violations,
article
65
section
15,
the
accessory
keeping
of
laboratory
animals
is
forbidden,
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
O
BX
BX
Chair
members
of
the
board,
matt
fitzgerald
sullivan
worcester,
one
post
office
square
in
boston
on
behalf
of
the
petitioner
bcp
b
property
llc-
we
are
here
today
quite
simply
seeking
approval
to
include
one
accessory
use,
the
accessory
keeping
of
laboratory
animals
to
the
list
of
approved
uses
at
the
site.
This
is
the
former
boston
globe
headquarters
site
at
135,
morrissey
boulevard.
BX
Very
briefly,
by
way
of
background
in
july
of
2018,
the
petitioner's
predecessor
and
interest
appeared
before
this
board
seeking
approval
to
change
the
use
and
occupancy
from
primarily
newspaper
publishing,
use
to
a
list
of
of
several
new
uses,
particularly
research
and
development
of
laboratory
use.
BX
What
they
did
not
do
at
that
time,
however,
was
also
request:
the
accessory
keeping
of
lavatory
animals
use
or
otherwise
known
as
vivarium
use,
which,
which
is
a
critical
and
for
many
lab
10.
It's
an
absolutely
necessary
use,
incidental
to
the
lab
and
research
and
development
use.
So.
A
Hold
on
hold
on
mr
fitzgerald,
it's
good
to
see
that
you've
landed,
you've
landed
in
the
private
sector.
It's
good.
BX
A
BX
So
this
this
accessory
use
will
be
incidental
to
not
necessarily
all
of
the
tenants
but
to
the
tenants
who
do
animal
testing,
so
you
know
being
as
there
is
no
restriction
as
to
the
the
research
and
development
use.
This
use
is
going
to
be
accessory
to
you
know
wherever
the
research
and
development
use
that
conducts
animal
testing.
BX
I
believe
construction
has
been
completed.
I
I
have
some
some
members
of
the
petitioners
team
on
the
call
I
believe
alan
coder
or
matthew
stegall.
If
we
can
elevate
them
to
panelists,
they
might
be
able
to
elaborate
as
to
the
tenant.
You
know
the
tenant,
marketing
and
so
forth.
So.
BY
BZ
Yeah,
so
you
know,
redevelopment
of
the
property
to
a
creative
office
has
been
completed,
we're
in
process
of
converting
the
property
for
r
d
use.
We
are
in
discussions
with.
You
know
one
potential
tenant
working
to
finalize
a
lease
for
roughly
40
percent
of
the
building
for
those
r
d
uses,
and
we
have
signed
one
existing
lease,
which
is
not
a
laboratory
use
with
noble
apparel.
It's
occupy
100
000
square
feet.
A
K
Plans
are
fine,
no
questions
in
terms
of
the
proposal.
AD
E
BY
Yes,
jared
igerman
for
reuben
genius
and
rose
I'm
here
with
quinlan
lock
from
the
developer
rise
together
and
kevin
deebler.
The
architect.
A
A
I
was
just
trying
to
save
mr
fortune
some
breath
so
go
ahead.
That's
okay!.
AP
E
Did?
Okay
great
all
right,
so
I'm
gonna
go
to
six.
This
is
for
six
rare
erickson
street.
This
is
direct.
A
new
mix
use
four
and
five-story
structure
at
6r
erickson
on
lot.
One
structure
contains
a
parking
podium
with
two
building
volumes
above
one
containing
three
floors
of
office
and
the
other
four
stories
of
multi-family
dwelling
units.
A
landscape
deck
occupies
a
portion
of
level
two,
the
violations,
article
25
section:
five,
the
flood
hazard
district
article
65,
section
18..
This
is
useful
use
of
waterfront
service
district
article
65,
section
19.
The
proposed
far
is
excessive.
E
Article
65,
section
19,
the
proposed
building
height
is
in
feet
is
excessive
article
65,
section
19,
the
maximum
residential
percentage
of
gfa
is
excessive.
Article
65,
section
19,
the
proposed
front
yard
is
insufficient
article
65
section
19.
The
proposed
side
guard
is
insufficient
in
article
65,
section
41,
the
proposed
austria
parking
is
insufficient.
E
This
is
for
adar
erickson
street
direct,
a
new
one-story,
boat
storage
and
maintenance
building
with
addressed
at
8r
erickson
and
a
new
marina
on
lot
3..
The
marina
consists
of
both
land
and
waterside
improvement.
Pairs.
Ramps
boat
slips
as
well
as
accessory
office,
lounge
and
restroom
space.
The
violations
article
25
section
5,
is
the
flood
hazard
district
article
65,
section
19,
proposed
building
height
is
excessive
in
feet.
E
Direct
a
new
five-story
structure
at
18r
ericsson
on
a
portion
of
lot
2
18r
ericsson
is
now
is
a
new
mixed
use,
five-story
structure
with
lobby
and
local
service
retail
on
the
ground
level
and
multi-family
dwelling
units
on
the
upper
levels.
Lot
2
also
contains
the
structure
also
known
as
20r
ericsson
violations.
Article
25
section,
5
flood
hazard
district
article
65,
section
18,
use
of
waterfront
district
article
65,
section,
19,
18r
and
20
are
combined
on
the
same
lot,
exceed
both
maximum
residential
percentage,
gfa
and
maximum
residential
lot
coverage.
E
Article
65
section
19
the
proposed
floor
day
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
65,
section
19,
the
proposed
building
height,
is
excessive
in
feet.
Article
65
section
19,
the
proposed
front
yard,
is
insufficient.
Article
65
section
41,
the
proposed
offspring
parking
is
insufficient
in
article
65,
section
42.13,
or
more
lots
and
on
the
same
lot
this
is
for
20r.
E
E
20
erickson
is
a
new
mixed
use,
five-story
structure
with
lobby
and
parking
on
the
ground
level.
The
multi-family
dwelling
units
on
the
upper
levels
lot
2
also
contains
a
structure
also
known
as
18r
ericsson.
The
violations,
article
25
section
5
flood
hazard
district
article
65,
section
18,
waterfront
service
district
use,
article
65,
section
19,
the
floridian
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
65,
section
19.,
proposed
building
height,
is
excessive
article
65,
section
19,
the
18-hour
and
20-hour
combined
on
the
same
law
vote
exceed
the
residential
percentage.
E
BY
BY
On
this
graphic,
the
site
is
shown
in
light.
Yellow
it's
at
the
end
of
the
port
norfolk
peninsula
in
dorchester
on
the
graphic
north
is
actually
to
the
right.
You'll
see
the
southeast
expressway
at
the
top
and
then
a
ponzi
river
towards
the
bottom.
The
port
norfolk
existing
neighborhood
is
a
one
family
neighborhood.
You
can
see
that
to
the
left
of
the
site
and
the
venezia
restaurant
parking
lot
is
right
next
door
just
below
next
slide.
Please.
BY
Originally
this
peninsula
was
built
out
for
industry.
There
are
old,
brick
buildings
on
erickson
street
you'll
notice,
with
our
addresses
we're
at
the
rears.
We
don't
actually
have
frontage
on
erickson
street.
It's
a
large
piece
of
land
about
three
and
a
half
acres.
The
buildings
you
see
are
metal
boat,
sheds,
there's
also
a
75
slit,
marina.
You
can
see
in
the
lower
left
that
was
set
up
in
the
1970s
next
slide.
Please
here's
the
proposed
site
plan
you
can
see
on
the
left.
There
are
three
proposed
lots.
BY
There
are
four
applications
because
there's
one
for
each
building,
so
there
will
be
about
a
one
and
a
half
acres
of
usable,
open
space
open
to
the
public
on
the
land
side,
starting
at
the
southwest.
That's
what
we
call
lot
one
there's
a
single
building,
that's
going
to
be
a
mix
of
apartments
and
offices
and
a
shared
parking
garage
then
going
counter
clockwise
lock.
Two
has
two
buildings
proposed.
A
Okay,
so
please
tell
us
on
lock
one
give
us
the
details.
While
we
are
at
it
on
the
the
uses
there,
how
you're
meeting
base
flood
elevation
and,
if
there's
anything,
related
to
chapter
91
that
we
should
know
about.
BY
Yes,
ma'am,
we
are
complying
with
the
new
article,
25a
coastal
resilience,
so
the
building
will
be
raised
and
the
architect
will
give
you
the
exact
figures.
The
square
footage
is
this
will
be
a
about
a
96
000
square
foot
building,
including
36
000
of
general
and
professional
office,
but
of
that
36
000
over
11
000,
as
a
community
room
available
to
the
public.
BY
The
sponsor
actually
would
be
occupying
the
rest
of
the
office
space.
The
presidential
is
about
33
000
square
feet,
total
of
32
units
in
this
building
and
the
shared
parking
garage
has
a
hundred
spaces.
A
BY
Yes,
overall,
we
have
that
in
a
slide,
but
I'll
state
it
to
you.
It's
slide
12..
If
you
needed
120
dwelling
units.
Overall,
there
are
going
to
be
20
studios,
59,
one
bedrooms
and
41
two
bedrooms.
BY
The
average
size
mean
average
494
for
the
studios
671
for
the
one
bedrooms.
I
I
think
it's
the
next
slide
and
953
for
the
two
bedrooms.
I
don't
have
to
have
a
breakdown
by
building
but
again
overall,
it's
120
units.
CA
Yes,
madam
chair,
thank
you.
The
the
breakdown
for
building
a
in
the
residential
units
is
eight
studios.
11,
one
bedrooms.
A
Sorry,
eight
studios,
eight
studios,
eight
yep.
BZ
BY
BY
BY
Okay,
let
me
get
the
number
we'll
do
the.
AM
Previous
slides
show
the
lots
it's.
CA
BY
Residential
there
will
be
ground
floor,
retail
3600
square
feet,
but
no
office.
BY
BY
No,
no
man,
we've
got
a
lot
of
three
now
so
to
summarize
lot
of
three
lot:
three
is
the
both
of
the
boathouse,
that's
purely
boathouse
use,
showing
it
doesn't
really
matter
which
graphic
you
use,
but
it's
the
largest
building
at
lot,
three
at
the
northwesterly
corner
of
the
site.
It's
over
an
acre
lot,
it's
a
22,
300
square
foot,
building
the
boathouse
and
it
rises
to
49
feet
above
grade.
A
BY
If
we
could
go
back
to
the
presentation,
I'm
sorry
perhaps
slide
six.
The
open
space
is
spread
out
across
the
site.
Most
of
it
is
on
the
waterfront
directly
so
that
also
the
part
of
the
site
is
subject
to
chapter
91,
the
northwesterly
corner,
but
actually
the
suddenly
part
of
the
site
is
not
subject
to
chapter
91,
but
the
open
space
covers
both.
I
perhaps
just
turned
it
over.
I
still
remember
kevin
to
show
you
the
madam
chair,
mr
secretary.
AM
Members
of
the
borough,
kevin
dealer,
rudy,
architects
as
well.
I
reside
in
dorchester,
specifically
article
25
and
25a
deal
with
resiliency
and
open
space
which
compound
the
conditions
leading
to
our
height
and
density.
This
is
a
view
that
shows
the
improvements
we
would
make
to
the
public
way
off
of
erickson
street.
AM
We
believe
it
is
also
our
duty
to
make
sure
that
the
open
space
that's
required
at
the
water's
edge
is
accessible
and
the
public
understands
how
to
use
this
space.
You
can
keep
going
through
the
slides.
The
next
slide
shows
exactly
what
we're
talking
about
this,
rendering
the
type
of
open
space
that
the
public
is
looking
for.
A
Yeah,
so
we
understand
harbor
walk.
We
understand
all
this.
What
what
what
I've
heard
criticism
about
is
that
some
of
these
projects
that
are
on
the
waterfront
use
the
requirement,
the
basic
requirement
from
of
of
harbor,
walk
and
other
chapter
91
requirements
as
their
open
space.
A
AM
To
make
this
community
more
robust
is
the
reuse
of
this
particular
piece
of
property.
This
has
been
an
important
part
of
dorchester's
history,
its
connection
to
the
water,
which
has
really
been
closed
off
for
the
greater
before
it's
its
existence.
It's
been
a
private
industrial
use
or
a
private
marina
and
got.
A
It
got
it
yes,
and
will
the
buildings
be
any
level
of
lead
or
how?
Yes,
these
are.
A
So
a
couple
of
other
questions,
so
you
need
relief
on
this
office
and
residential
requirement
of
25
in
the
ws
zoning
district.
Can
you
tell
us
what
you're
at
in
your
proposal.
BY
Yes,
at
lot,
one
there'll
be
38
residential
exceeding
the
25
cap
at
lot.
Two
across
the
two
buildings
it's
much
higher.
The
residential
would
be
90
percent
of
the
gross
floor
area,
rather
than
the
25
percent.
A
A
So
I
guess
cumulative
and
is
there
a
reason
why
you're
keeping
the
lot
separately.
BY
Yes,
actually,
right
now,
it's
pretty
chaotic.
There
are
seven
lots
according
to
city
records,
so
this
is
actually
a
simplification
and
it
allows
the
project
to
be
developed
in
phases.
But
of
course
everything
is
shared
across
the
three
lots.
BY
I
can
I
can
check
that
number
quickly.
The
overall
square
footage
of
the
project
world
for
areas
about
203,
000
square
feet
and
multi-family
is
109..
So
it's
slightly
over
50
percent
you're
correct.
A
CA
Madam
chair
apologies
for
interrupting.
I
did
want
to
correct
the
building
c
breakdown,
as
I
think
I
might
have
given
you
incorrect
numbers.
There.
BT
A
Okay,
okay,
let
me
just
see
what
else,
so,
how
will
you
be
meeting
chapter
91
guidelines
about
water
dependent
uses.
BY
AM
Okay,
one
of
the
site
plans
actually
shows
the
chapter
91
lines
and
it
really
came
to
be
a
part
of
how
we
partialized
the
lot
so
that
one
of
these
lots
could
you
know,
straightforwardly,
be
water,
dependent
and
and
manage
through
the
the
process
of
state
filings,
etc.
But
we've
been
working
through
the
complexities
of
those
lines
and
where
they
fit
the
setbacks
from
the
water's
edge
to
comply
with
chapter
91,
so
we're
inside
that
jurisdiction
area.
AM
But,
as
you
mentioned,
the
idea
of
open
space
you
can
get
to
and
and
return
from
this
site
safely,
with
the
public
way,
improvements
that
were
we're
creating
at
erickson
street.
A
AM
A
Let
me
just
also
ask
you
a
couple
of
other
questions:
are
there
going
to
be
any?
There
are
no
three
family
units
proposed
you
maxed
out
at
two
bedrooms.
BY
BS
BY
It's
slightly
over
13,
it's
rounds
up
to
16.,
it's
15
and
a
fraction.
It's
13.
A
13,
okay
and
then
finally
talk
to
me
and
us
about
traffic,
because
this
is
a
not
not
a
highly
traffic
zone,
except
for
events.
BY
Yes,
so
that
was
obviously
a
clear
focus
over
the
last
five
years
during
large
project
review
and
the
community
outreach
and
the
the
project
mix
has
changed
over
that
time
in
order
to
optimize
for
traffic
at
one
time
there
was
actually
a
hotel
proposed,
and
that
was
eliminated,
but
I'll
turn
it
over
to
quinn,
there's
actually
going
to
be
a
pilot
for
a
shuttle
service.
You
can
talk
about
that.
CA
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
so
there's
really
three
items
here
to
to
talk
through
about
our
traffic
as
it
wasn't
concerned
from
the
neighborhood
that
was
brought
up
through
the
article
80
process
in
doing
that
through
through
that
process,
we
we
did
have
three
major
items
that
were
listed
in
the
in
the
bpda
board:
memo
the
first
being
a
tdm
plan
that
we
worked
on
with
the
bpda
and
btd
to
ensure
that
we're
limiting
and
reducing
the
amount
of
traffic
coming
to
and
from
the
site.
CA
A
CA
And
then
the
apologies.
The
third
item
was
the
was
a
slow
street
study.
So
through
that
article
80
process,
we
did
include
a
slow
street
study
to
be
funded
by
the
proponent
and
facilitated
by
us.
That
would
replicate
the
btd
slow
streets
program
for
this
neighborhood
to
reduce
the
amount
of
traffic
and
speeding
through
the
neighborhood.
BY
We
haven't
negotiated
the
tapa,
yet
I
suspect
that
will
be
an
ask,
but
it's
it's
so
far.
It's
not
been
required.
There
are
by
the
way,
25
ev
vehicle
spaces,
though
so
that
that
has
been
already
baked
in.
A
Okay,
okay,
so
let's
see
if
my
math
is
right,
so
there's
a
hundred
car
garage
plus
15,
so
115
spaces
for
120
residential
units
and
36
000
square
feet
of
office:
okay,
okay,
let's
just
see
how
are
the
plans,
mr
ehrlich.
G
Well,
this
is
quite
a
project.
The
plans
technically
are
really
good.
I
think
the
questions
that
I
have
really
have
to
do
with
the
fact
that
this
is
sort
of
a
jewel
of
a
site
and
there's
very
few
like
them
anywhere
in
the
city,
and
so
it
just
raises
a
whole
host
of
questions.
So
let
me
start
with
first
of
all
on
the
residential
units:
is
there
a
mix
of
rental
and
for
sale?
Or
is
there
all
one
of
the
other?
G
I
think
it's
all
rental,
it's
all
rental
and
you
said
that
the
affordability
was
13,
which
is
the
absolute
minimum
under
you
know,
city
regulations
is,
was
there
not?
I'm
surprised
there
wasn't
pressure
to
from
the
community
to
move
that
number
higher.
CA
Yeah,
so
thank
you
and,
and
one
of
the
things
that
we
worked
on
when
we
first
came
on
to
this
project
a
year
ago,
was
to
bring
the
resident
the
idp
units
back
into
the
project.
Originally,
there
were
plans
to
be
moved
somewhere
else
outside
of
this
project
as
as
part
of
it.
So
we
we
did
work
to
make
sure
that
that
was
included
back
into
the
program
here,
which
which
took
a
good
amount
of
effort
on
our
ends
to
ensure
that
we
could
meet
that
thirteen
percent.
G
Though
there's
13
on
site
is
there
additional
contribution
to
the
the
fund.
CA
There
is
not
we,
we
are
just
over
the
13
at
thirteen
point
three.
So
now.
G
And
well
I
mean
you've
hit
the
minimum,
but
I
just
my
point
is
it
is
the
minimum,
but
let
me
move
on,
I
mean
the
real.
The
real
question
is
that
is
this
going
to
be
a
you
know
this.
G
I
said
sort
of
a
jewel
of
the
waterfront
of
boston
and
it's
been
underutilized,
and
this
will
certainly
make
a
much
better
utilization
of
the
space.
But
the
real
question
is
has
to
do
with
public
access
and
if
you've
got
a
150
space,
parking
spaces
and
you've
got
120
or
so
don't
if
I'm
a
little
wrong
in
the
numbers,
120
residential
units
and
you've
got
office.
BY
Now
it's
a
good
question.
I
want
to
first
emphasize
that
the
public
access
is
not
just
on
the
perimeter,
so
there
is
across
the
whole
site,
but
but
you're
correct
in
that,
probably
the
most
likely
public
users
are
going
to
be
the
neighborhood
residents.
BY
G
Before
quinn
starts,
let
me
let
me
just
sort
of
make
a
point.
Yes,
it's
an
isolated
peninsula.
BP
G
What
you
are
doing
is
going
to
make
it
a
much
more
attractive
peninsula,
in
the
same
way
that
you
know
when
the
when
the
umass
boston
campus
was
built,
you
know,
there's
it's
not
just
peop
college
students
who
walk
that
perimeter
on
the
harbor
walk
there.
I
think
you
you're
going
to
end
up.
This
is
going
to
be
an
attraction
for
the
whole
city,
and
I
I
would
say,
and
to
pick.
AZ
A
Is
public
and
if
any
I
mean
I
don't
live
anywhere
close
to
charlestown,
but
I
love
walking
that
charlestown
waterfront
and
I
love
walking
that
east
boston,
waterfront
and
so
so
the
question
then
becomes:
how
do
you
accommodate
it?
So
it
is
open
to
the
rest
of
the
city.
AM
Madam
chair,
may
I
address
that
point
I'll
as
a
north
festa
resident.
We
all.
We
also
have
that
harbor
walk
around
umass
boston,
which
is
highly
utilized
by
all
the
residents
right
now.
You
can't
walk
to
this
site,
so
the
fact
that
we
do
actually
have
lay
by
parking
spaces
on
the
outside
that
one
could
come
in
that
would
be.
You
know,
marked
with
a
number
of
you
know,
limitations
on
the
hours
of
use
and
sort
of
the
shorter
time
periods.
AM
G
G
Public
program
open
space,
you
got
a
a
bunch
of
you,
know,
plantings,
etc.
I
mean
this
is
going
to
be
a
very
attractive
part
of
the
city.
You
are
really
creating
something
very
new
and,
I
think,
potentially
very
exciting.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that,
as
the
chair
said,
it's
not
privatized
and
not
restricted,
because
it
won't
be
it
and
I
think.
CA
Absolutely,
and
just
I,
and
and
thank
you
for
that,
and
on
on
the
other
end,
I
did
want
to
mention
that
one
of
the
comments
through
the
neighborhood
process
that
we've
heard
was
that
we
also
don't
want
to
drive
too
many
people
to
this
destination.
The
neighborhood
is
already
concerned
about
the
amount
of
people
coming
into
and
out
of
the
neighborhood
as
is,
and
as
they
on
the
other
end
would
like
to
see
this
not
become.
You
know
the
the
destination
that
everybody
in
the
city.
CA
It
comes
to,
rather
a
public
space,
that's
open
to
them
and
has
you
know
frequent
visitors
instead.
G
Of
being
yeah,
I
get
that
I
just
you
know
I
I
know
port
norfolk
quite
well,
and
it's
mostly
single
family
homes
and
it's
just
sort
of
isolated,
tight
little
neighborhood.
But
the
truth
is
this
is
going
to
be
a
very
appealing
part
of
the
boston
waterfront,
and
I
just
I
think,
it's
a
pipe
dream
to
think
that
this
is
not
going
to
be
appealing
to
to
a
lot
of
people
beyond
who
don't
just
live
up
aboard
norfolk.
CA
Right,
yeah
and
then
the
last
thing
we
wanted
to
do
was
close
this
site
off.
This
isn't
open
to
the
public,
which
alludes
to
a
little
bit
of
the
street
improvements
that
we
did
along
erickson
street
to
really
invite
the
public
into
this
space.
A
So
let
me
just
see
the
the
trouble
that
I
continue
to
have,
and
I
don't
know
if
mark
is
satisfied,
but
the
trouble
I
continue
to
have
is
that
the
tidelands
are
commonwealth
tidelands
and
they
are
held
for
the
common
for
everybody
who
lives
in
the
commonwealth.
A
CA
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
Yes,
so,
as
jared
had
mentioned
before,
there
is
a
shared
parking
program
on
this
site.
We
expect
that
many
of
the
residential
users
will
be,
even
though
we
are
providing
a
plethora
of
opportunities
to
use
transit
that
they
will
be
using
their
cars
during
the
day,
which
should
open
up
some
parking
in
that
regard
and
as
well
as
on
the
surface
on
the
street
level.
There
are,
and
please
kevin
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong
about
20
parking
spaces
as
well.
AM
On
street
parking,
as
well
as
as
I
mentioned
in
this
diagram
right
in
between
buildings,
b
and
c,
there
are
places
that
one
could
leave
their
car
parked
parallel
park
for
a
short
period
of
time.
A
How
long
is
it
going
to
take
for
resident
permit
parking
stickers
to
go
up?
I
mean
you
know
so
so
I
think
we've
beaten
that,
but
that
I,
I
think
you
understand
clearly
what
we
are
asking
for.
Hopefully,
while
we
continue
the
discussion,
you
can
figure
out
exactly
how
that
is
going
to
be
accommodated.
A
The
second
thing
is
on
the
waterfront.
Is
that
also
in
a
certain
way,
privacy
privatized
or
is
there
going
to
be
any
programs
or
anything
that
is
that
is
going
to
bring?
You
know,
residents
from
you
know
a
little
bit
in
from
dorchester
to
that
to
that
pier
to
that
public,
pier.
AM
Well,
I
don't
care
that
this
is
a
a
balancing
point
for
this
this
project
and
how
it
was
formed,
and
our
we
mentioned
some
of
the
initial
uses
that
did
look
like
we
were
creating
a
destination
here.
We
have
been
able
to
work
with
the
community
on
the
scaling
of
this
kind
of
open
space
and
the
words
meandering
and
pathways
are
intended
to
create
a
place
where
people
can
move
the
program.
AM
AM
Obviously,
we
need
this
project
to
move
forward
to
solidify
what
the
program
vision
is
there,
but
chapter
91
is
very
clear
about
how
we
would
be
using
our
open
states
in
the
future
and
but
really
driving
a
destination
and
making
sure
people
know
that
this
is
there.
This
is
the
open
space
that
people
deserve
in
dorchester
and
to
be
a
rare
kind
of
project.
AM
A
Yes,
I
I
you
know,
I
think
a
number
of
us
know
fort
norfolk
pretty
well.
A
number
of
us
know
it
from
the
ws
zoning,
but
you
know
there
are
some
good
programs,
like
you
know,
all
the
work.
That's
happened
in
east
boston
on
piers
park
and
that
sailing
program
or
other
things
like
that
that
could
bring
some.
A
You
know
good
activity
to
children
and
youth
in
the
neighborhood
that
I'm
surprised
that
you
haven't
explored
some
further,
because
all
I
can
see
as
I
look
at
this
is
just
an
extension
of
some
of
the
stuff.
That's
happened
in
in
the
seaport
where
we
look
back
and
say:
oh,
my
god,
how
did
it
end
up
being
and
feeling
so
isolated,
so
privatized,
so
non-welcoming
in
the
design?
A
But,
more
importantly,
in
the
programming-
and
I
will
I
will
put
my
my
hat
on
from
my
experience-
is
that
now
in
the
organization
I
used
to
work
for
we're
trying
to
figure
out
how
to
bring
equity
to
the
waterfront
in
the
seaport.
A
AM
I
I
would
add,
madam
chair,
that
this
group
has
has
been
very
dedicated
to
the
this
being
a
working
waterfront
that
primarily
has
a
focus
on
fishing
and
using
water
safely
with
a
new
marina.
G
Just
I
would
just
summarize,
madam
chair
the
plan.
The
plans
themselves
are
are
very
good.
A
Any
other
questions
from
the
board
is
anybody
here
to
speak
in
support
of
this
proposal.
AD
Yes,
madam
chair
good
afternoon,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
the
project
has
gone
through
the
community
process
for
over
four
and
a
half
years
and
through
multiple
revisions
for
design
unit
count
green
space
and
everything
else
in
terms
of
development,
with
both
support
and
opposition
throughout
the
process,
neighbors
expressed
concerns
regarding
climate
mitigation
efforts.
However,
there
seemed
to
be
consensus
regarding
acceptable
unit
count,
arcing
and
design.
AD
M
Y
Good
afternoon
and
chair
members
of
the
board
of
miner
perez
representing
the
carpenters,
you
know
my
ontario
on
behalf
of
congress,
indian
carpenters
and
legal
work
throughout
the
city
of
boston,
want
to
go
on
record
and
support
in
particularly
our
members
living
in
the
city
of
dorchester.
Thank
you.
O
Oh
something
that
raised
hand
just
came
up,
go
to
stephan
donahue
go
ahead.
Are
you
looking
to
give
testimony
on
this
proposal.
BL
BL
I
was
in
support
of
erickson,
that's
true,
but
I
I
just
came
in
and
seeing
this
being
the
water
fronting.
I
was
just
concerned
about
the
volume
of
getting
in
out
of
the
port.
A
BL
Budding
yes,
that
abuts
the
christ
community
church-
I
was
just
a
little.
I
love
the
idea
of
having
the
port
and
that
many
residents
there
as
a
pastor,
I'm
just
a
little
concerned
with
the
the
in
and
out
of
there.
It's
just
it's
hard
to
get
out
of
the
port
being
a
resident
there.
For
four
years,
I'm
just
a
little
I'm
wondering
about
the
traffic
volume
coming
in
and
out.
CB
CB
If
you
stand
with
me,
madam
chair,
I
know
you
you
like
to
move
these
things
along.
I've
got
two
paragraphs
and
eight
bullet
points.
I
will
start
by
saying
mr.
CB
Cuz,
okay,
I
can't
give
you
all
this
at
the
top
of
my
head.
I
think
after
spending
spending
hundreds
of
hours
in
the
last
five
years,
together
with
other,
committed
community
members
evaluating
this
project,
working
in
good
faith,
to
find
ways
to
resolve
the
issues
and
compromise
in
a
manner
which
would
benefit
the
neighborhood
as
well
as
our
future
neighbors,
it's
more
than
frustrating.
Having
worked
with
changing
personnel
at
the
bpba
and
within
the
development
team.
CB
I
will
start
by
saying
we
want
union
jobs,
we
want
housing,
but
we
deserve
a
project
that
works
for
the
community,
as
well
as
our
teaching
neighbors
and
respects
the
unique
environment
adjacent
to
an
appointed
river
within
the
area
of
critical
environmental
concern.
Where
this
project
sits,
it's
literally
the
mouth
of
the
napoleon
river
right
in
the
estuary,
it's
a
very
special
project,
as
everyone
has
said.
CB
CB
What
I
would
really
suggest
here,
if
anyone
everyone
would
consider
respectfully
define
this
project
until
the
process
can
be
completed
in
good
faith
and
the
alternative.
The
way
it
sits
now
is
to
deny,
because
it
just
doesn't
fit
it's
premature
if
you
go
way
back
1988,
which
is
in
ancient
history,
but
it
was
1988
a
port
north
plan.
A
definitive
plan
was
prepared
by
the
boston
redevelopment
authority
with
input
from
everyone
relevant
state
and
local
agency.
CB
It
identified
every
issue
raised
by
the
community
members
during
this
process
that
was
followed
by
the
first
ipod
in
the
city,
the
creation
of
the
port
walton
district.
It
was
in
the
city
of
boston
zoning
code
and
that
district
information
was
essentially
incorporated
by
reference
into
article
65,
which
was
adopted
in
2001..
CB
It's
not
ancient
history,
one
of
the
most
important
things
that
the
bra
plan
itself
suggested
was
that
the
waterfront
should
not
be
lined
with
poor
structures
and
yet
in
the
neighborhood,
with
a
35
foot
high
limit,
which
is
respected
everywhere
else.
These
people
are
going
to
almost
double
that
height.
CB
There's
no
justification
for
it
other
than
their
economic
need,
and
I
noticed
in
the
nearly
30-minute
presentation
by
the
proponent.
There
was
not
one
mention
of
any
kind
of
a
hardship
and
a
hardship
is
a
critical
element
of
granting
zoning
relief.
But
I
need
to
tell
you
that,
but
I
just
noticed
that-
and
I
think
it
needs
to
be
brought
up
the
density.
CB
This
project
will
result
in
a
43
increase
in
the
number
of
housing
units
on
less
than
10
percent
of
the
land
in
the
peninsula.
The
water
dependent
use
is
a
critical
change.
It
will
change
one
of
the
last
pieces
of
working
waterfront
in
the
city
of
boston
to
essentially
a
residential
enclave
with
an
attached
office
structure.
CB
The
shared
I
can
plan
has
not
been
tested.
If
it
fails,
the
only
alternative
is
to
pop
in
the
naval
streets.
Both
frankly
in
the
river-
and
I'm
not
joking
when
I
say
that
we're
isolated
on
the
outside
of
the
southeast
expressway
and
the
railroad
tracks,
there's
no
other
place
to
know
during
culver,
the
business
model
has
changed
for
office
workers.
We
all
know
that
we're
remote
here
now
office
work
now
is
gradually
remote
with
no
indication.
It'll
never
go
back
fully
to
the
old
office
model.
CB
Your
reliance
on
shared
parking,
I
think,
may
have
worked
before
covered,
but
I
doubt
it
will
work
now
and
one
other
interesting
question
about
their
blocking.
If
you
look
at
this
site
plan,
not
part
of
their
project
but
immediately
adjacent
is
a
distillery
that
distillery
has
an
occupancy
rating
by
isd
of
149
persons.
It's
got
19
parking
spaces.
CB
They
regularly
run
events
in
that
in
that
space
up
until
now,
they've
used
the
overflow
area
of
this
site
for
their
overflow
parking.
I'm
sure
that's
not
going
to
happen
when
there
are
120
units
with
115
parking
spaces
immediately
adjacent
on
the
other
side.
Is
the
vanessa
complex,
an
extremely
good
restaurant,
a
great
functional,
a
great
winery?
CB
No
complaints
about
any
of
their
operations.
They've
got
350
parking
spaces,
they're
all
used
at
certain
points
during
the
year,
there's
no
other
place
to
go.
This
is
a
public
transportation
desert
the
site
is
hotline
from
the
nearest
bus
line,
then
over
one
mile
to
the
red
line,
the
traffic
access
issues
were
identified
in
1988
when
there
were
much
less
traffic.
Even
then,
it
was
essentially
concluded
that
the
traffic
issues
are
insurmountable,
particularly
in
the
points
itself.
CB
Finally,
the
marina
plan,
I
suspect,
may
just
be
a
trojan
horse
to
qualify
something
under
chapter
91,
because
their
construction
management
plan
schedules
that
will
be
completed
last
out
of
the
entire
project.
There
are
many
informed
residents
in
this
neighborhood
who
are
active
in
an
existing
network
who
strongly
believe
that
it's
not
financially
feasible
based
on
current
costs.
In
fact,
this
morning
area
has
not
been
dredged
in
50
years.
The
port
milwaukee
art
world
with
half
the
size
which
has
a
regular
program
of
wall
for
dredging
and
mooring
area.
CB
CB
I
think
boston
cannot
dis
goodbye,
the
hope
of
ever
having
real
water
depleted
uses
apart
from
yacht
clubs
and
bars
on
the
waterfront.
This
marina
used
to
be
a
sort
of
a
recreational
marina,
but
it
also
had
a
very
well
functioning
boat
repair
operation.
They
had
a
50
ton,
left
boston,
police
and
boston
fire
upon
the
boats
used
to
be
pulled
out
and
service
in
that
location,
and
now
they
have
to
go
outside
the
city.
A
The
mr
line,
I
was
waiting
for
you
because
I
remember
your
role
in
the
port
norfolk
zoning,
but
I
do
need
to
ask
you
if
there's,
if
you
can
close
your
comments,
because
we
do
have
others
who
are
waiting
to
to
comment.
Okay.
CB
CB
The
parking
is
nowhere
near
sufficient.
I'd
be
willing
to
spend
more
time
working
on
it
with
an
open
mind,
and
I
would
respectfully
request
that
the
developer
consider
the
same
thing
and
that
the
board
allow
her
to
follow
it,
even
if
it's
only
for
three
to
four
months.
Thank
you.
A
A
O
Okay,
no
mr
lisa
you've
been
on
youtube.
AY
CC
I
just
want
to
say
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
be
able
to
speak.
I
find
this
a
very
exciting
project,
but
after
16
years
of
working
coast
management
in
eight
years
as
directed
seaport
advisory
council,
I
find
the
project
as
presented,
does
take
away
opportunities
and
access
for
public
in
general.
It
basically
privatizes
the
area
and
causes
a
lot
of
concern
that
the
chapter
91
regulations
that
requires
that
you
have
to
set
back
and
then
options
for
ripping
your
rights
are
not
being
maintained,
and
I
would
like
to
see
the
proponents
take.
CC
This
back
work
a
little
bit
more
about
how
they
allow
people
to
access
from
the
street
to
the
water's
age
and
the
people
coming
from
the
world's
age
when
landed
by
the
ferries
or
whatever
boats
you're
having
it
really
goes
at
least
they're
on
the
land
side.
I
think
it
needs
a
little
more
work.
I
agree.
CC
It
is
a
very
nice
looking
project,
but
I
agree
with
mr
lyons
that
there's
some
work
that
needs
to
be
done
and
maybe
a
little
more
thought
would
be
helpful
because
we
do
need
access
to
the
wood's
edge
for
people
who
are
inland
and
people
who
come
to
visit
and
we're
in
a
very,
very
nice
site,
and
I
know
because
I
really
need
to
restaurant
at
least
10
times
a
year,
and
I
like
walking
around
I'm
sure
the
people
do
too.
So.
Thank
you
very
much
for
letting
me
speak.
E
CD
Yes,
greeting
madam
chair
and
members
of
the
board,
I'm
an
owner
and
resident
in
the
port
norfolk
peninsula
neighborhood
at
171
walnut
street.
My
name
is
cheryl
sweden.
At
this
time,
I'm
in
opposition
of
the
nepal
support
project
moving
forward
today.
My
request
is
that
a
decision
be
deferred
today
for
further
discussion
with
the
norfolk
neighborhood.
I'm
concerned
how
this
project
has
advanced,
thus
far.
It's
my
understanding
that
the
impact
advisory
group
never
reached
a
consensus
and
no
final
public
meeting
was
ever
held.
Traffic
is
still
a
concern.
CD
I
heard
information
regarding
a
trial
shuttle
that
was
referenced
in
the
presentation
today.
I
have
heard
many
presentations.
I
am
also
a
member
of
the
fort
norfolk
neighborhood
association
and
have
been
following
this
project
for
a
little
over
two
years
since
I
have
become
a
resident
of
boston
and
owner
and
resident
in
the
peninsula.
CD
It
is
concerning
regarding
the
traffic.
So
my
concern
is
with
the
shuttle,
with
the
shuttle
that
that
is
a
trial
and
what
would
happen
moving
forward
and
would
other
residents
other
than
those
involved
at
the
erickson
street
or
residents
or
occupants
be
have
access
to
that
shuttle?
The
other
concern.
A
A
Okay,
who
is
this?
Who
is
emma
okay?
So,
let's
see
jeff,
you
know.
I
know
this
has
been
through
an
article
80
process.
Mr
hampton
from
the
bpda,
this
has
been
through
the
article
80
process.
It
sounds
like
the
bpda
board
has
approved
it,
but
there
still
seems
to
be
a
number
of
outstanding
issues
about
the
waterfront
and
waterfront
access
for
the
general
public.
A
A
Yes,
please
put
your
name
and
address
on
the
record
and
if
you
could
very
specifically
respond
to
the
questions
that
mr
ellick
and
I
have
been
focused
on,
and
that
is
general
public
access
and
maintaining
of
that
access,
and
I
think
somebody
else
also
suggested
something
about
how
will
members
of
the
public
bring
their
boats
in
there
and
what's
the
the
way
of
accessing
that?
A
CE
So
my
name
is
steven
harvey
and
I
live
on
armadine
street
in
dorchester
neighborhood
in
boston.
What
I'll
say
to
the
the
as
far
as
access
to
the
the
shoreline
the
project
does
in
its
community.
CE
Our
mitigation
does
provide
2.,
2.17
acres,
97
000
square
feet
of
publicly
privately
owned
public
space,
so
the
public
will
have
access
to
over
two
acres
of
space.
CE
Now
how
the
the
wharf
will
be
run
that
would
be
determined
how
because
it
is
a
a
private
entity,
the
wharf
itself,
but
I
I
believe
that
the
the
development
team
will
be
working
with
the
neighborhood
to
make
sure
that
public
access
is
as
as
can
be
as
maintained
as
possible.
The
the
development
team
rise
tends
to
stay
on
the
side
and
have
their
offices
on
their
site
and
meetings.
We've
made
sure
that
and
made
an
understanding
that
they
should
be
a
good
neighbor
to
the
residents
around
them.
A
So
you
know
mr
harvey,
I
know
it's
difficult
coming
in,
as
the
did
you
say
third
project
manager
on
this.
I
know
it's
it's.
I
know
it's
a
difficult
thing
to
do,
but
has
the
city
of
boston
environment
department
looked
at
some
of
the
thoughts
about
climate
ready
about
you
know
introducing
more
wetlands
or
whatever?
It
is
to
just
make
sure
that
all
these
these
these
buildings
will
in
fact
be
sustainable
for
the
long
term.
CE
Yes,
that
was
during
my
time
as
project
manager
that
was
putting
together
community
benefits.
Community
benefits,
package
and
mitigation
was
my
number
one
role.
The
reason
discussions
that
we
had
with
our
resiliency
team
was
making
sure
that
the
buildings
one
were
at
the
appropriate
levels
for
water
rise,
and
also
that
folks
that
were
living
in
the
building
are
working
in
the
building
would
be
able
to
enter
and
leave
the
site
without
any
emergency
assistance.
So,
besides
the
transportation
mitigation
that
was
provided,
which
was
substantial,
we
also
made
sure
that
resiliency
concerns
were
priority.
CE
The
that
is
what
port
norfolk
and
the
community
absolutely
have
as
their
number
one
concern,
and
they
have
done
a
lot
of.
They
have
done
a
lot
already
with
the
open
space
that
they
have
surrounding
the
area,
but
we
made
sure
to
in
effect
fortify
that.
A
Okay,
thank
you.
So
let
me
go
back
to
the
development
team.
You've
heard
what
the
concerns
are.
Can
you
just?
Let
me
know
what
your
thoughts
are
on,
how
you
will
provide
or
propose
to
provide
public
access
and
to
ensure
that
that
stays
into
the
future,
because
I
I
feel
your
tentativeness
and
I
understand
the
the
concerns
that
the
port
norfolk
community
has,
but
we
also
have
to
understand
that
the
waterfront
is
a
public
resource.
BY
That's
made
chair,
understood
completely,
it's
clear
that
we
need
to
give
you
more
detail,
so
I
would
suggest
that
we
defer
in
order
to
provide
it.
BY
I
can,
I
can
say
categorically
that
the
public
access
must
be
provided,
as,
as
you
well
know,
especially
in
the
chapter
91
area
there,
there
will
be
a
management
plan,
that's
approved
by
massdep
waterways,
but
I
think
we
would
all
be
best
served
if
we
provide
that
information
explicitly
so
that
you
have
it
and
you
have
these
details,
we
don't
want
there
to
be
any
question
that
that
there
could
possibly
be
a
privatization
which
is
not
our
intention.
A
And
when
do
you
expect
dep
waterways
to
you
know,
provide
you
with
their
decision.
BY
It's
probably
not
in
the
near
horizon,
it's
probably
months
away,
knowing
their
backlog.
They
will
not
review
the
management
plan
until
you
get
through
the
licensing
process,
but
that
does
not
mean
we
can't
provide
our
proposal
to
this
board
sooner.
A
I
I'm
just
going
to
miss
ambassador.
Can
you
mute
everybody,
but
the
board
members
please
so
I'd
like
to
just
have
a
conversation
with
board
members,
because
I
do
feel
that
in
a
lot
of
ways
the
development
team
has
thought
through
their
projects,
but
there
are
some
outstanding
issues.
A
Is
it
thoughtful
of
us
to
make
a
decision
today,
but
but
have
some
kind
of
information
or
are
have
the
final
decision
dependent
on
the
submittal
of
certain
pieces
of
information?
So
this
is
something
I
toss
out
to
the
board.
May
we
have
a
discussion
on
that.
G
A
So
so
so
now,
mr
owlette,
do
you
want
to
put
that
motion
on
the
table
approval
with
I'm
assuming
design
review
and,
let's
just
let's
just
itemize
what
it
is
that
we
want
to
see?
Okay.
A
So
if
I
can,
there
are
within
two
months
we're
going
to
bullet
point
it
and
I'm
just
going
to
reverse
your
thing
only
because
it's
just
right
in
front
of
me
is
we
within
two
months.
We
want
our
transport
transportation
details.
A
That's
a
and
b
is
everything
connected
to
the
waterfront
related
to
waterfront,
public
access,
marina
and
I'm
sorry,
I
might
have
missed
something
else.
I'm
just
watching.
I
mean.
A
And,
and
also,
and
also
use
of
the
waterfront
right,
because
we
want
to
make
sure
that
yeah
okay,
do
you
wonder
anything
else
that
anything
else
that
that
we
have
that
we
would
want
to
understand.
AJ
This
is
tom,
just
if
the
board
does
need
additional
information
from
the
developer.
I
would
suggest
the
deferral
to
consider.
AJ
A
The
open
meeting,
I
think,
I
think
what
we
will
do,
I'm
sorry
tom
to
interrupt
you,
but
we
can
bring
this
as
board
final
arbiter.
To
not
not
board
is
a
board
final
arbiter
to
to
to
reconsider
all
these
things
so
that
I
think
that
will
meet
open
meeting
law,
but
in
the
meantime
the
applicant
does
have
a
chance
to
respond
to
what
it
is
that
we
need.
A
I'm
sorry,
I
just
went
dark
and
I
just
want
to
know
that
everything's.
Okay
is
everything:
okay,
okay,
fine!
You
can
hear
me
fine.
My
screen
went
went
blank,
so
I
don't
know
what's
happening
so
does
that
make
sense
tom
bringing
it
in
as
board
final
arbiter.
A
Yeah,
I
I
just
you
know
that
we've
heard
the
we've
heard,
the
the
merit
center
and
in
its
entirety,
and
I
think
I
don't
think
our
decision
will
change,
because
in
concept
we
are,
we
are
in
support,
but
there
are
details
which
we
are
not
in
support
of,
and
that
is-
and
that
is
what
is
what
is
tying
us
all
up
in
knots
here.
A
So
so
we
have
a
motion.
We
have
a
second
anything
else
to
add
those
two
things:
okay,
all
those
in
favor
any
opposed
motion
carries.
Can
I
ask
the
technical
team
at
at
the
board?
If
you
could,
please
see
if
there's
a
reason
that
I
cannot
be
see
the
screen
or
have
anything
on
it.
A
Okay,
so
let's
I'm
sorry
for
this,
it
is
now
almost
one
o'clock.
Let
us
take
a
five
minute
break
reconvene
at
one
and
then
we
will
go
to
the
rediscussions
okay.
We
still
have.
E
E
To
demolish
an
existing
structure,
directly
four
unit
dwelling
townhouse
designed
buildings
and
providing
parking
for
eight
vehicles
by
an
existing,
curb
cut
the
violations.
Article
65
section
8.,
the
mfr
is
forbidden
using
the
2f
5000
sub
district
article
65
section
41,
offspring
parking
is
insufficient.
E
Oh
I'm,
sorry,
our
street
parking
requirement
proposed
parking
is
tandem
which
limits
maneuverability
article
65,
section
32.
This
is
in
the
overlay
district
review
required
article
65,
section
9.
The
fluidity
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
6569,
the
builder,
has
assessment
stories
and
article
65
section
9.
The
side
yard
is
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
CG
Thank
you,
mr
secretary
good
afternoon,
madam
chair
and
members
of
the
board.
My
name
is
mark
zuvatsky,
I'm
the
property
owner
and
developer
for
32
taylor
street
and
for
the
record,
my
address
is
for
payne
street
dorchester
mass
o2122.
CG
This
application
seeks
to
raise
an
existing
structure
on
a
7
600
square
foot
lot
and
erect
four
family
style
townhouses
intended
for
home
ownership.
Each
townhouse
is
seventy
one
thousand
seven
hundred
and
thirty
square
feet
with
three
beds
and
two
and
a
half
baths
and
two
off
street
tandem
parking
spaces.
CG
Each
includes
a
private
roof
deck
which
shall
be
accessed
via
a
hatch
or
seeking
relief
for
multi-family
mfr,
whereas
this
is
a
205
000
sub
district.
Although
tandem
parking
is
loud
under
article
65,
each
spot
must
be
independently
maneuverable
and
so
we're
seeking
relief
for
vehicle
maneuverability.
Our
far
is
0.91,
whereas
0.5
is
allowed.
CG
A
A
Okay,
okay
and
those
roof
decks
would
be
individual
roof
decks.
Okay,
how
the
plants,
mr
robinson.
K
Plans
are
good,
no
question.
I
think
this
side
of
the
the
area
has
a
mix
of
different
size
buildings
and
I
think
it's
it's
fairly
consistent
with
some
of
the
adjacent
buildings
and
they're.
A
Okay,
also,
do
you
have
your
condensers
next
to
your
neighbors.
CG
We
can
relocate
those
to
the
roof
mountain
chair.
They
are
shown
on
the
side
yard,
but
I'll
be
happy
to
make
that
change.
AP
AD
Good
afternoon,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board
george
flynn,
with
mayor's
office
named
services,
our
office
hosted
in
the
butter's
meeting
for
the
project
on
february,
8th
a
butters
and
the
civic
association
were
generally
in
support.
There
was
some
concern
regarding
open
space
and
size.
At
this
time.
Our
office
would
like
to
defer
judgment
to
the
board.
Thank
you.
O
Sorry:
okay,
thanks,
okay,
okay
and
then
I'll
go
to
stephen
diving.
BL
CB
Yes,
my
name
is
john
lyons
176
walnut
street.
I'm
president
of
the
norfolk
civic
association
we
met
on
this.
We
took
a
vote.
It
was
unanimous
to
support.
I
just
want
to
say
specifically
that
this
developer
is
a
great
example
of
how
things
should
be
done.
He
went
to
the
about
his
first.
He
figured
out
what
would
work
designed
a
building
which
fits
in
with
the
architecture
around
it,
and
the
violation
on
the
parking
is
is
his
attempt
to
create
more
parking
than
is
required
by
the
code?
Okay,
thank
you.
A
Thank
you.
I
miss
ambassador
anybody
else.
K
I'll
make
a
motion
to
approve,
I
think,
with
bpda
design
reviews,
I
think
specifically
looking
at
the
rear
yard
the
parking.
I'm
not
sure.
I
understand
the
conflict
of
too
much
parking
and
too
little,
but
I
think
there's
a
blend
here
that
can
work
for
the
community.
BI
G
A
Any
opposed
motion
carry
now
101.
We
will
reconvene
at
1
10.,
okay,
thank
you.
BV
X
A
Is
being
recorded,
the
march
22nd
zoning
board
of
appeal
is
now
resuming
before
we
begin.
I
did
want
to
make
a
change
to
request
that
there
that
the
that
the
minutes
reflect
that
I
misspoke
and
that
I
did
mean
to
say,
call
up
the
chair
rather
than
bfa,
to
get
an
update
on
those
addresses
on
erickson
street
on
the
information
that
they
are
requesting.
A
E
Mountain
chair,
it
is
1
15,
obviously
116..
Mr
joseph
has
an
appointment
at
1
45
and
I
was
wondering
if
we
could
take
the
interpretation
out
of
out
of
context
because
it
is
115
116..
A
Let's
see
so
yes,
we
do
because
they're
suggesting
that
isd.
So,
yes,
let's
go
to
okay.
E
Is
the
applicant
on
for
columbia,
road.
A
BX
Yes,
madam
chair
matt,
fitzgerald
sullivan
worcester,
I
will
be
representing
1514
condominium,
trust,
columbia,
road
condominium
trust
and
one
of
the
unit
owners,
lauren
tolman.
A
Okay,
so,
mr
so
now
that
I
have
that
and
then
is
and
mr
joseph
will,
you
put
your
name
and
address
on
the
record
too.
A
Okay,
in
the
meantime,
mr
buck,
can
you
tell
us
exactly
why
it
is
you
think
that
isd
odd
in
its
determination.
CH
Yes,
thank
you,
madam
chair
1514,
our
columbia,
road,
south
boston,
it's
in
ward,
7,
it's
non-conforming
structure
behind
the
structure,
non-conforming
extension
of
non-conforming
article
nine
section,
one
sex
says
it
needs
public
notice.
A
CH
I
I
I
received
documents
from
mark
joseph
on
december
20th
and
in
those
documents
I
discovered
a
fraudulent
forged,
certified
plot
plan
and
a
flawed
maneuverability
report
which
shows
vehicles
striking
each
other.
I
visited
with
the
engineer
who
who
prepared
the
report
he
says
yeah.
He
did
not
use
the
boston
zoning
code
to
prepare
his
report.
I
also
have
my
own
private
engineers
report,
which
I
gave
to
the
board.
CH
Z
CH
CH
CH
We
have
violations
issued
that
that
picture
you're
showing
right
now.
That's
it!
That's
that's
the
forged
document
I
visited
with
the
architectures
on
that
part.
A
All
I
need
to
understand
really
is,
if,
if
I,
if
I
can
read
between
the
lines,
the
issue
that
you
are
concerned
with
is
that
the
parking
at
1514
are
is
there
it
is
it's
not
permitted
to
be
there
they're
not
allowed
parking
back
there,
and
it's
impacted
you
through
damage
to
the
vehicles
at
15,
12.,
no.
CH
A
No,
but
you
did,
but
you
did
give
a
a
a
suburban
address.
We
just
need
to
know
what
happens
at
15
12.
CH
A
And
if.
V
CH
A
CH
The
first
you
supremacist
permit
was
rescinded
by
the
author,
john
gorman.
The
second
one
I'm
in
possession
of
now
was
submitted
with
a
forge
okay,
okay,.
O
A
Well,
mr
bill,
can
you
hold
on
please,
may
I
have
the
representation
for
the
owner
at
1514
columbia,
road
tell
us
how
this
permit
was
issued.
BX
Thank
you
manager,
again,
matt
fitzgerald,
sullivan
worcester
on
behalf
of
the
permit
holder,
1514
columbia,
road
condominium,
trust,
I'm
just
to
provide
a
little
background
in
context
and
I'll
try
to
summarize,
as
quickly
as
I
can,
in
february
of
2020
isd
issued
a
violation
for
the
failure
to
secure
a
permit
for
three
off-street
parking
spaces.
BX
So
mr
burke
is
correct
in
that
sense,
so
isd
did
cite
my
client
in
2020.
My
client
was
unaware
that
the
parking
spaces
were
never
properly
permitted.
The
the
predecessor
and
interest
of
the
prior
owner
constructed
the
parking
spaces
without
securing
proper
permits.
To
do
so.
So
my
client
was
unaware
of
that
when,
when
they
they
purchased
the
property
in
order
to
correct
the
violation,
they
then
filed
a
new
supremacist
permit
application
for
two
parking
spaces.
Originally
they
tried
to
legalize
the
three.
BX
BU
BX
Ahead
with
with
two
parking
spaces,
so
they
follow
the
a
supremacist
application
for
two
parking
spaces
that
application
included
a
site
plan
showing
the
two
spaces
prepared
by
gma
architects
in
a
certified
plot
plan
prepared
by
a
registered
land
surveyor.
BX
BX
V
A
Okay,
it
was
for
two
parking
spaces-
please
I
don't
know
whose
screen?
Yes?
Can
you
please
zoom
in
on
the
on
the
lot
a
please-
and
this
was
this-
is
a
pre-existing
building.
A
A
BX
And
please
either
john
gorman's
also
available.
If
correct
me,
if
I'm
wrong-
and
he
was
the
he
was
the
one
that
filed
the
permanent
application.
So
if
john
can
speak
up
for
any
incorrect
information
that
I
might
be
providing.
BX
A
Okay,
two
family,
and
so
you,
okay
got
it
okay,
and
so
these
were
the
plans,
the
one
on
the
on
the
screen
on
the
right
hand,
side
that
was
used
to
permit
the
spaces
correct.
A
AX
You
very
much
thank
you,
madam
chair,
for
bringing
me
a
hand
in
here,
so
there
was
an
application
for
use
of
premises
for
three
parking
spaces
which
was
denied
due
to
maneuverability.
AX
It
was
very
tight,
as,
as
the
previous
interview
said,
and
then,
and
then
they
applied
for
two
and
that
permit
was
rescinded,
because
there
was
a
right
of
free
issue
that
went
to
court
and
the
court
ordered
the
decision
for
that
right
of
way
to
remain
so.
The
1514
lawyer
can
ask
access
it
any
time
due
to
previous
argument
made
by
both
the
front
and
the
back,
and
then
they
reapplied
for
a
permit
for
use
of
premise.
They
submitted
plans.
AX
CB
AX
AX
A
Okay,
okay,
so
I
think
now
I
understand
okay,
thank
you,
mr
book,
so,
and
and
now
I
have
one
more
question
for
the
representative
of
the
owner
at
1540
and
for
mr
joseph
was
this:
was
this
information
based
on
a
a
registered
plot
plan
or
how
was
this
determination
made
about
this
access
and
the
parking.
V
A
Okay:
okay,
thank
you
and
what
is
his
name
again.
CH
A
A
CH
Don't
know
that
name
ma'am,
the
the
plot
plan
that
wasn't
that
was
given
to
me
by
mark
joseph,
was
prepared
by
doug
stefanoff
from
west
broadway
and
southwest
okay
and.
AP
CH
CH
On
on
my
question
to
fitzgerald,
in
terms
of
the
one
family
for
57
years,
according
to
isd
records,
it
was
a
single
family
house.
I've
been
at
my
property
since
1976
for
for
over
40
years
bill,
spain
was
the
owner.
He
testified
that
he
has
no
driver's
license.
He
testified
for
50
years.
There
were
no
cars
out
there,
there's
a
one,
the
single
family
house
and
all
the
records.
A
So
so
I
think
hold
on
mr
book
hold
on
a
minute.
So
when
was
the
change
of
occupancy
happening
on
on
the
building?
Mr
fitzgerald?
BX
Looks
like
in
2017,
madam
chair.
According
to
the
certificate
of
use
and
occupancy,
it
looks
like
in
217,
an
alt
was
issued
to
convert
from
a
single
to
a
two.
A
Okay,
okay,
so
so,
mr
bulk,
it
looked
like
the
change
of
occupancy
was
done.
Correct.
A
Yeah
I
mean
what
what
I,
what
needs
to
be
traced
is,
I
think
the
you
know
when
when
did
the
increase
of
density
occur
and
did
it
occur
legitimately.
BX
Well,
as
we
use
it's
multi-family
so
residential,
you
know
so
it's
it's
allowed
use
for
guidelines,
but
I
I
but
the
driveway
the
partners.
A
Okay,
thank
you
so
so
I
think
that
we
have
all
the
information
we
need.
Is
there
anything
else
you
wanted
to
say
mr
bug,
yeah.
A
CH
The
entire
building
was
torn
down
in
2016
under
h150
code.
He
didn't
get
any
board
of
appeals
approval.
There
was
no
neighborhood
meetings.
There
was
no
long
forms.
CH
Yeah
he
asked
the
board
of
appeals.
He
asked
the
board
of
appeals
to
renovate
a
single
family.
They
denied
him.
He
went
back
and
said
he
had
a
three
family.
He
made
it
into
a
two.
The
the
right
of
way
that
mark
joseph
mentions
is
not
ten
feet
wide.
It's
nine
feet
wide
and
the
right
away
on
15
and
14's
property
is
was,
is
10
feet
now,
but
the
document
you
showed
me
earlier
shows
that
it's
eight
foot,
seven
wide
and
eight
foot
nine
inches
wide.
The
foundation
was
moved
illegally.
CH
CH
See
go
ahead.
The
maneuverability
report,
that's
on
the
screen
right
now
shows
vehicle
number
two
driving
over
the
proposed
usable,
open
space
and
also
shows
use
number
two
striking
the
ac
units.
I
met
with
the
author
of
that
report
on
last
friday
and
he
told
me
he
did
not
use
boston's
zoning
codes
he's
not
familiar
with
it
under
article
68.
CH
It
states
that,
for
the
maneuverability
they've
been
they've
been
cited
for
multiple
violations.
The
maneuverability
states
that
they
need
maneuverability
area
exclusive
of
the
nine
by
twenty
parking
spots.
They
do
not
have
it.
The
vehicles
on
those
drawings
appear
to
be
striking
each
other
they're
based
on.
A
The
story
now
now
miss
so
mr
buck.
Yes,
mr
ambassador,
can
you
kind
of
mute
everybody,
so
we
can
just
have
a
moment?
Okay,
so
it
so.
The
the
very
specific
question
that
mr
book
asked
is
that
isd
urd
in
issuing
the
permit
for
the
parking
we
have
confirmed
that
the
use
the
change
of
use
or
the
use
of
the
two
family
is
legitimate
under
the
mfr
zoning.
G
I'll
make
a
motion
that
isd
did
not
air
in
issuing
the
permit.
For
that
very
specific
purpose.
E
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
All.
The
11
30
cases
for
rediscussion
following
the
first
case
calling
voa
106
5886
57
webster
street.
This
is
a
change
of
arch
from
a
three
family
dwelling
to
a
four
family
dwelling
construct
a
new
four
story:
ray
yard
edition,
with
exterior
decks,
also
construct
a
fifth
floor:
penthouse
with
roof
deck,
remodel
the
entire
building
violations,
article
25
section
five:
this
is
the
flood
plain
regulations,
article
2017,
section
nine.
This
is
in
the
east
boston,
ipod,
article
53,
section
8,
a
multi-family
dwelling
is
forbidden.
E
Article
53,
section,
9
lottery
is
insufficient
article
53
section
9,
the
floridia
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
53,
section
9,
the
bill
in
height
is
excessive
article
53
section
9
to
build
a
height
number
of
stories.
It's
excessive
article,
53
section
9,
the
usable
open
space
is
insufficient.
Article
53,
section
9
the
side
yard's
insufficient
article
53
section
9,
the
ray
yards,
insufficient
article
53,
section
52,
restructuring
restrictions
and
article
53,
section
56
off
street
parking,
isn't
sufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
good.
AT
BP
A
So
so
counselor,
as
you
can
tell,
we've
had
a
slightly
long
day.
AT
AT
AT
AT
You
can
see
our
existing
condition
here.
We
do
a
better
view
of
this.
The
building
to
the
middle
is
essentially
a
four-story
building,
with
the
essentially
half
story
at
the
top
we're
proposing
to
finish
off
that
fourth
story,
which
would
be
consistent
with
our
building
immediately
adjacent.
On
the
left
hand,
side,
we
will
preserve
the
existing
structure
and
perform
a
complete
renovation
of
the
entire
building.
Next
slide,
please
I'm
just
showing
some
neighborhood
context
as
well.
As
you
can
see,
the
area
has
a
number
of
taller
buildings
that
have
been
recently.
AT
Writing
the
story
yep.
I
can
go
to
this
go
to
this
slide
here
we
go.
It's
probably
a
good
one,
so
you
can
see
here
no
next
slide,
please
you
can
see
here
that
the
upper
level
is
being
modified
to
essentially
square
off
the
existing
fourth
level
consistent
with
the
two
buildings
to
our
left.
The
building
to
our
immediate
left
has
a
penthouse
condition
as
well,
which
is
a
fifth
story.
We
originally
proposed
this
as
a
larger
penthouse.
We've
reduced
that
through
the
community
process,
and
we
do
have
a
elevation
of
that
as
well.
AT
AT
AT
Oh
next,
going
forward
probably
up
to
13,
maybe
14.
there
we
go
so
because.
AT
There
we
go
so
as
we're
seeing
here
both
we're
showing
the
basement
and
next
two
levels:
we're
not
proposing
any
habitable
space
in
the
lower
level.
At
our
basement
level
we
are
proposing.
You
can
see
the
structural
elements
on
the
right
side
of
the
screen
and
then
we're
renovating
units,
one
and
units
two.
These
would
be
two-bedroom,
two-bedroom,
two-bath
style
units
as
we
move
up
the
building
next
slide.
Please
we
show
unit
three
and
then
unit.
Four
is
at
the
fourth
level,
where
you
would.
AT
You
would
enter
on
the
fourth
level
and
have
additional
space
at
that
upper
level,
which
would
be
part
of
how
to
access
the
private
rooftech
so
essentially
just
reprogramming
the
entire
building,
adding
that
addition
to
the
rear,
which
would
infill
the
back
portion
of
the
property
and
then
squaring
off
for
all
intents
and
purposes,
the
fourth
level,
with
that
penthouse
level
added
above.
AT
Is
correct?
We
are
in
the
flood
zone,
so
we
are
not
permitted
to
utilize
any
portion
of
that
basement
for.
K
Plans
are
good.
I
I
think
the
addition
is
consistent
with
some
of
the
abutting
buildings
in
terms
of
the
filling
out
of
the
fourth
floor,
the
penthouse
there
is
an
adjacent
that
has
a
similar
size
penthouse.
Just
to
can
I
just
confirm,
and
and
when
I
was
looking
so
it
it
you
are
looking-
is
the
18
there's
an
18
foot
dimension?
That's
the
amount
of
the
added
square
footage
on
the
on
the
floors
on.
I
see
a
third
fourth
you're,
adding
18
feet
of
actual
enclosed
space
and
then
six
feet
of
deck
is.
K
AT
Through
the
chair,
mr
robinson,
on
the
the
portion
of
the
building
actually
has,
I
believe,
it's
the
left
side.
We
can
probably
go
back
to
maybe
my
floor
plan
that
goes
back
a
lot
further.
This
is
more
of
a
yeah.
This
is
probably
a
good.
AA
AT
And
then
adding
the
decks
to
the
rear
as
well.
A
Q
Morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
foreign
is
with
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services
aboard
a
butters
voice
concerns
regarding
density
heights,
the
penthouse
with
group
deck
and
rear
edition.
The
jeffree
square,
neighborhood
association
also
hosts
this
project
as
well,
and
our
office
would
like
to
refer
to
the
porch
judgment
at
this
time.
Thank
you.
E
B
Are
in
support
recently
this
month.
AT
P
Z
Thank
you
very
much
for
your
time.
Craig
butner,
59,
webster
street
east
boston.
Our
family
has
resided
at
59
webster
street
for
23
years,
and
we
are
direct
to
butter
to
57
webster.
Please
know
we
firmly
oppose
this
project,
as
it's
currently
proposed
since
the
first
presentation
for
this
project
in
june
2020,
which
was
22
months
ago,
the
developer
of
57
webster
street
has
been
unwilling
to
listen
to
the
constructive
feedback
of
all
of
butters,
especially
the
direct
abutters
at
59
and
55
webster.
Z
The
scale
of
this
project,
as
presented
five
different
times,
has
always
been
too
large,
affecting
the
natural
light
views
and
general
scale
of
the
adjacent
properties
on
the
entire
block
of
webster.
I
am
referring
to
the
rear
edition
exclusively,
and
I
don't
know
if
we
can
go
to
that
rendering.
That
would
be
super
helpful.
Now.
A
Can
you
please
us
quickly
summarize
okay.
BC
Z
Generally,
they
haven't,
there's
been
no
dialogue
back
and
forth
with
direct
abutters
off.
You
know
other
than
the
meetings
in
which
they
presented
this
overly
sized
scheme,
the
entire
time.
Okay,
the
condition
in
the
back.
It
absolutely
dwarfs
the
two,
the
two
of
otters
and
you
can
see
that
in
the
rendering
and
then
they
were
never
willing
to
reduce
it
from
you
know,
we
we
gave
them
suggestions
to
make
it
a
very
reasonable
three
family
and
they
never
wanted
to
go
to
that.
It
was
always.
We
want
a
four
family.
Okay,.
Z
AT
Know
time
is
short
here
I
I
certainly
don't
do
respect
to
mr
buckner,
I
mean
he
said
best
himself.
We've
been
at
this
for
quite
some
time.
There
were
multiple
iterations
of
this
project.
We
have
modified
the
project
to
try
to
address
the
concerns,
and
certainly
there
has
been
dialogue
through
the
abutter
process.
AT
It
seems
that
you
know
if
it's
not
his
way.
It's
no
way,
and
I
know
that
sometimes
that's
a
difficult
order
to
fill.
We
think
we've
done
the
best
here,
based
upon
the
size
and
dimensions
of
his
building.
We
were
very
clear
in
trying
to
not
exceed
anything
that
he
has
on
his
own
property
to
try
to
not
make
this
dwarf
any
of
the
abundant
property.
So
I
feel
those
comments
are
important.
One
of
mr
barbara's
comments.
Thank.
BR
BR
E
This
is
for
four
and
for
six,
both
of
them
have
the
same
purpose
and
same
violations:
erecting
new
four-story
building
with
four
units
front
and
rear
decks,
and
five
parking
spots
at
the
rare
easement
proposed
to
driveway
access
to
rear
parking,
a
violations,
article
65
section
8,
a
mfr
in
a
3fd
zone-
is
forbidden.
Article
65,
section
9,
the
additional
lot
areas
insufficient
article
6569,
the
floridian
ratio,
is
excessive.
Article
65,
section
9.
The
bill
has
excessive
stories.
Article
65,
section,
9,
usable
open
space
is
insufficient
and
article
65
section
9.
E
CI
Good
afternoon,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board
attorney
john
palgini,
on
behalf
of
the
applicant
and
with
me
today,
is
eric
zacherson,
who
is
the
team
architect
so
46
ashburn
park
in
dorchester?
Is
mr
fortune
stated
zoning's
three
family
three
thousand
four
ashbourne
park
is
418
feet.
A
So
sorry,
sorry,
please
again
the
the
zoning
is
sorry,
please
repeat
what
you
said.
CI
Sure
the
zonings
three
f,
three
three
thousand
matter.
A
We
have
three
thousand
okay.
For
some
reason,
I
thought
they
were
in
three
f
tripled
in
the
triple
decker.
A
Both
in
three
fd,
okay,
so
okay,
so
three
fd
with
a
minimum
lot
size
of
3
000
square
feet,
got
it
that.
A
CI
Park
is
four
thousand
one
hundred
eighteen
square
feet.
Six
ashmont
park
is
four
thousand
two
hundred
and
sixteen
square
feet.
So,
as
mr
fortune
stated,
these
are
identical
projects.
The
proposals
to
raise
the
existing
distressed
homes
and
build
a
new
four
unit,
condo
with
five
off-street
parking
spaces
located
in
the
rear
of
the
building.
The
parking
will
be
accessed
through
a
common
driveway
between
buildings
to
limit
curb
cut,
apparently
there's
two,
but
by
doing
this
we'll
be
able
to
eliminate
one
of
those
to
add
more
on-street
parking
and
the
location
of
these.
CI
A
Sorry,
I'm
can
you
tell
us
about
the
building
the
the
building
scape,
because
I
know
the
3fd
district
was
supposed
to
be
triple
deckers.
So
can
you
tell
us
what
ashwan
park
looks
like
and
how
this
fits
into
ashmont
park.
CI
Yeah,
so
asheville
product
is
kind
of
a
blend.
There
is
on
the
street.
You
have
a
five
unit
building
you
have
some
commercial
across
the
street
and
two
down
two
properties.
CI
There's
also
a
vacant
lot
across
the
street
that
at
one
point
had
a
six
family
and
that
was
destroyed
by
fire.
Then
there
are
single
families
on
the
property
as
well
on
the
lot
street
as
well.
CI
As
you
remember,
this
came
before
you
guys:
bpd
made
a
recommendation
based
upon
that
we
deferred,
so
we
went
back
and
we
looked
at
the
bpda
recommendation
and
made
some
changes.
As
mr
excuse
me,
mr
fortune
stated
it's.
The
four
family
in
a
350
zone,
far
1.3
is
allowed.
We
have
proposed
1.41
at
4,
ashmont
and
6.
Ashmont
is
1.38,
so
minimal,
fr
violations.
CI
O
CI
Okay,
sorry,
the
side
yard
violation
is
due
to
that
common
driveway
between
the
two
buildings,
and
that
was
purpose
for
that
way
that
when
they
first
went
to
the
community
they
didn't
want
a
large
building.
They
wanted
two
smaller
buildings
and
limit
the
curb
cuts.
So
we
did
the
one
curb
cut
in
between
open
space.
K
The
plans
are
good,
I
mean
I
think,
most
of
the
buildings
I
mean,
there's
not
that
many
houses
on
ashmont
park.
They
are
pitched
roof.
There
is
a
triple
that
anchors
it
far
in,
but
I
think
no
real
questions
in
terms
of
what's
being
proposed,
pretty
straightforward.
AD
Yes,
good
afternoon,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
george
hwyn,
with
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services
our
office,
hosted
in
the
butter's
meeting
on
november
1st
last
year,
we
received
opposition
from
the
saint
mark's
area,
civic
association
in
the
ashmont
adams,
neighborhood
association.
AD
E
M
Madam
chair
salsa,
joe
mcgregor
city
council,
frank
baker's
office,
we'd
like
to
go
on
record
in
support
of
the
project.
O
Okay,
then
doug
and
jim
are
you
here
to
give
testimony
on
this
proposal.
O
AE
AE
In
the
february
8th
meeting,
the
board
was
planning
on
on
denying
it
for
density.
They
did
absolutely
nothing
to
address
the
density.
There
was
no
decrease
in
number
of
units,
no
decrease
in
the
number
of
bedrooms
no
decrease.
In
the
footprint
of
the
buildings.
AE
We
have
26
putters
and
neighborhood
association
members
in
opposition
to
this
that,
I'm
speaking
on
behalf
of
today,
we
did
submit
the
revised
opposition
letter
this
morn
yesterday.
It
was
added
to
the
record
this
morning
by
ms
alda
gracia.
B
No
madam
chair,
thank
you,
mr,
like
no.
The
bpda
doesn't
change
their
recommendations.
It's
still
too
big
for
us.
We
recommend
the
denial
on
both
parcels.
CJ
Okay,
thank
you.
I'm
from
the
on
the
executive
board
of
the
saint
box
area,
civic
association,
and
at
this
point
we
oppose
the
project
because
the
developers
have
not
brought
their
plans
either
to
the
abundance,
to
the
ashman
atom,
civic
association
or
to
the
st
mark,
serious
civic
association.
A
A
O
AY
Good
afternoon,
madam
chairman,
my
name
is
bridget
costello
and
I
live
at
222
ashmont
street.
I
have
lived
here
for
49
years
and
it's
directly
beside
the
house
on
the
corner
of
ashmont
park.
My
objection
is
the
amount
of
traffic
right
now.
Ashmont
street
is
a
bit
of
a
nightmare.
I
actually
had
to
have
and
no
parking
zone
put
in
front
of
my
house
to
be
able
to
get
out
of
my
driveway
ashmont
park
at
the
moment.
AY
A
Thank
you,
okay,
counselor,
have
you
been
in
touch
with
the
civic?
Has
the
plans
change
since
you
were
in
touch
with
the
civic
association
in
january.
F
CI
I'm
sorry
so
I'll
just
go
through
the
changes.
That
was
when
somebody
was
talking
so
the
height.
Initially
we
had
a
43
foot
height
40
foot
is
compliant
we're
at
40
feet,
building
alignment.
We
were
at
three
feet
off
the
street,
bpda
recommended
five.
We
went
to
five
so
we're
five
feet
off
the
street.
There
was
an
off
street
loading
as
it
was
not
a
path
from
the
parking
to
the
building,
and
that
was
added
so
that
also
eliminated
that
violation.
CI
So
we
did
work
to
the
bpda
design
guidelines
and
what
they
recommended
and
did
the
best
we
could
with
that,
the
the
development
team
actually
spent
time
going
to
the
neighbors.
Mr
fortune
referenced
the
support
letters.
I
believe
they
submitted
27
letters
of
support.
Today.
Okay,.
A
Thanks
mr
bill
jr,
mr
mr
hampton
I
we
don't
have,
of
course,
what
these
rediscussions
the
bpda
recommendations,
but
was
density,
a
concern,
because
it
appears
that
the
applicant
has
tried
to
satisfy
all
the
other
issues
that
were
raised
in
the
in
the
recommendations.
B
A
BC
E
AP
E
All
right,
this
is
a
constructed
new
single
family
home
on
a
vacant
lot
at
98,
cresthill
road,
the
violations
article
51
section
on
the
lot
air
is
insufficient.
Article
51
section
9
log
with
is
insufficient
and
article
51,
section
9
of
the
building
heights
assessment
stories
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
N
N
So,
quite
simply,
we
were
before
the
board
of
february,
8th
february
8th.
We
took
a
deferral
because
of
the
neighborhood
concerns
we're
proposing
a
single-family
house
on
the
lot,
the
issues
that
we
had.
We
have
three
areas.
The
lot
area
was
insufficient,
the
width
was
insufficient
and
the
building
height
as
a
result
of
the
concerns
with
the
neighborhood.
N
A
N
Check
if
you
can
go
to
the
plot
plane
first
to
look
to
the
outside,
so
you
can
see
a
lot,
a
lot
of
measurements,
not
not
onto
that,
but
with
the
house
in
it.
So
we
are
our
lot
with.
We
have
frontage.
We
actually
have
51
foot
of
frontage,
but
the
lot
width
is
about
42
and
a
half
feet
wide
because
of
the
way
the
lot
is
situated.
It
comes
off
of
parson
street.
N
So
the
frontage
is
fine,
but
the
other
areas
on
the
width
are
not.
They
are.
A
A
N
So
there's
two
spaces
underneath
in
the
garage,
so
we
had
one
of
the
concerns
with
the
neighborhood
was
the
height
we've
reduced
the
reason
the
building
is
high,
where
it's
at
is
because
of
the
fact
that
we
put
parking
underneath
we
thought
that
would
be
more
more
acceptable
and
better
for
for
the
house
and
for
the
neighborhood
and
for
again
for
it
to
be
a
single
family
and
have
a
owner
occupant
to
come
into
it,
so
that
raised
the
height
of
the
building.
But
the
lot
with
the
frontage
is
fine.
N
It's
the
rest
of
the
width
on
the
from
the
back
side.
That
makes
it
too
small
got.
K
I
think
the
plans
are
good.
It
is
a
there's,
some
topography
that
they're
also
dealing
with
on
the
site
as
it
slopes
down.
So,
in
fact,
it's
a
single
family
on
this
corner.
A
lot
of
no
real
questions
on
the
proposal.
AT
Actual
civil
plans
and
on
this
would
be
a
12
foot
wide.
That
would
be
a
vpda
requirement:
okay,
okay,.
A
BE
BE
BE
Amenable
to
supporting
the
project
if
the
height
was
reduced
and
that
there
was
a
deed
restriction
that
was
introduced
to
ensure
that
it
would
be
owner-occupied
from
my
understanding.
Those
changes
have
been
made
by
the
applicant
and
we
believe
that
that
should
address
their
concerns
once
again,
we'll
defer
to
the
board.
Thank
you.
CK
Good
afternoon,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board
pam
mullany
on
behalf
of
city
councilor,
liz
braden
would
like
to
go
on
record
in
support
of
this
project,
as
conor
newman
described
the
components
of
work
iteratively
with
the
neighbors
regarding
the
strong
desire
for
increased
owner
occupancy
in
this
neighborhood,
which
is
around
23
percent
owner
occupied
on
the
record
in
support.
Thank
you.
CL
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
annabelle
gomes
of
the
brighton
austin
improvement
association,
we'd
like
to
go
on
record
and
support.
We
do
think
that
it's
important
to
build
single
families.
We
don't
really
have
too
many
people
coming
to
us
asking
to
build
a
single
family,
and
that
is
the
property
that
would
be
great
for
our
family
to
buy
and
live.
Thank
you.
CL
O
BA
BA
I
would
like
to
commend
the
proponent
and
the
attorney
could
speak
to
this.
I've
been
in
touch
with
them
multiple
times.
Even
today,
we
would
like
to
have
the
covenant
for
owner
occupancy
be
as
close
as
possible
to
the
city's
standard
owner
occupancy
covenant.
A
So
hold
on
mr
security
just
know
just
know
that
this
board,
this
board
of
appeal,
cannot,
you
know,
take
and
put
in
its
record
any
kind
of
understanding.
That's
been
developed
with
the
community,
but
but
thank
you
for
putting
that
on
the
record.
BA
Could
the
attorney
representing
the
proponents
speak
to
the
owner
occupancy
issue?
Please
no.
A
No,
no,
we
we
will.
I
will
limit
that
we
are
running
very
late
and
I
just
do
need
to
bring
closure
to
this.
Thank
you
for
your
comments.
A
Okay,
given
that
information,
may
I
have
a
motion
please.
E
Thank
you,
you're
calling
me
next
three
cases
calling
voa
126
67304
to
18
chaney
street.
There
are
two
companion
cases,
boa
one:
two,
six,
six,
seven:
three:
two:
twenty
to
twenty
eight
chaney
street
and
boa
one
two,
six,
six,
seven,
three,
six
three
schuyler
street:
this
is
for
four
to
eighteen,
chaney
street.
E
This
is
erect
a
58
539
square
foot,
four-story
59
residential
unit
building
with
28
parking
spaces;
nine
dedicated
to
20
to
28
chaney
street,
a
garage
in
basement
the
violations.
Article
50
section
19
uses
conditional
for
nine
ancillary
parking
spaces
at
20
to
28
chaney
street
article
50,
section
20,
the
maximum
building
height
is
45
feet.
The
proposed
is
55.
E
AD
E
This
is
for
20
to
28
chaney
street,
a
10
738
square
foot,
three-story
nine
residential
unibuilding
with
nine
parking
spaces
in
the
garage
adjacent
four
to
eighteen,
chaney
street
violation,
article
50,
section
44.2,
existing
building
alignment,
the
model
calculation
not
provided
article
50
section
28
multi-family
is
forbidden.
Article
50,
section,
28,
nine
axillary
parking
spaces
conditional
article
50,
section
29.
The
additional
odd
area
is
insufficient.
E
E
This
is
for
three
skyler
combined
vacant.
Fourth
4029
square
foot
parcel
with
vacant
2074
square
foot
fossil
following
six
thousand
one
hundred
three
square
feet
and
erect
a
five
thousand
six
hundred
fifty
six
square
foot,
three
story:
six
residential
unit
building
with
six
parking
spaces
on
the
lot,
the
violations-
article
50
section
28,
a
multi-family
use-
is
forbidden.
Article
50,
section
29,
the
additional
allot
area
is
insufficient.
Article
50
section
28
of
the
florida
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
50
section
29,
the
usual
open
space
is
insufficient
article
50
section
29.
The
front
yard
is
insufficient.
E
S
Good
afternoon,
madam
chair
and
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
taronda
ellis
from
the
jpmdc
31
germania
street
in
jamaica,
plain
just
a
quick
comment.
Well,.
A
One
hold
on
just
for
a
second
miss
ellis.
I
would
like
clarification
because
for
some
reason
I
thought
we
had
okay.
Actually
I'm
looking
at
my
notes
from
the
meeting
of
december
14
2021
and
it
looks
like
at
that
point.
We
approved
with
design
review
3
schuyler
street
correct.
That
is
correct
right,
yes,
oh
so
so
we
should
just
make
sure
that
we
are
right
away.
Let's
can
we
go
ahead
and
confirm
the
decision
for
we
schuyler
street.
AJ
Madam
chair,
we
have
the
the
notation
on
the
file
that
it
was
approved.
A
A
In
the
meantime,
anybody
who
has
to
make
comments
on
this,
please
make
sure
you're
raising
your
hand,
and
I
would
like
to
hear
from
roxbury
grove
hall
residents,
because
I
know
there's
a
lot
of
people
from
jp
who
are
interested
in
commenting,
but
I'd
like
to
make
sure
that
residents
from
the
budding
streets
and
her
budding
cheney
are
being
heard.
Okay,
so
go
ahead.
Ms
ellis
talk
to
us
about
4
to
18
and
20
to
28..
A
S
You,
madam
chair,
I
just
wanted
to
thank
the
members
of
the
board
for
the
early
deferral
on
this.
There
have
been
several
meetings
with
residents
of
the
community
subsequent
to
our
meeting
back
in
december
the
project
proposal.
At
this
point,
as
I
understand
it,
we
have
submitted
over
100
letters
of
support
from
residents.
A
Sorry,
ms
ellis,
it's
been
a
while
since
we've
heard
this
so
please
tell
us,
describe
the
project
tell
us
if
anything
has
changed
since
the
time
you
were
here.
S
Okay,
thank
you.
So
what
I
will
say
is
that,
since
the
time
we
were
there
since
we
were
last
with
this
group,
we
have
had
several
meetings
of
of
members
of
the
community
and
we
have
worked
through
a
number
of
the
concerns
that
the
community
raised.
So
I
will
be
brief.
S
Given
the
you
know,
the
the
level
of
intense
conversations,
what
I
will
say
is
that
we
have
proposed
the
this
campus,
which
we
looked
at
previously
of
a
senior
housing
solution
along
with
some
home
ownership,
and
so,
if
we
could
just
scroll
to
the
the
site
plan,
we
can
kind
of
all
refamiliarize.
S
Next
slide,
please
so
we
proposed
a
multi
function
in
campus.
Here
is
the
senior
building
at
the
middle
of
the
site
on
chaney
street
59
units
and
then
adjacent
to
that.
Just
immediately
to
the
left
is
the
homeownership,
I
will
just
say
I'm
going
to
defer
to
questions
by
the
community.
I
think
you
will
be
very
surprised
and
pleasantly
surprised
that
the
board
will
hear
from
the
community
that
we
are
in
a
very
good
space.
So
I
don't
want
to
take
a
lot
of
time.
A
So
let
me
just
ask
if
my
so
so
the
the
project
at
4,
4
to
18
is
proposed
as
elderly
housing
and
the
other
ones
are
proposed
as
home
ownership.
A
It
looks
like
we
the
the
request
from
the
last
time
you
were
here.
You
did
say
it
was
lead
silver,
all
of
all
electric,
and
we
did.
I
think
the
question
was,
or
the
request
to
you
was
to
study
the
massing
and
also,
I
think
the
question
was
about
all
the
about
the
parking
and
drop-off.
S
That's
correct,
and
so
madam
chair
and
members
of
the
board,
one
of
the
things
that
we
feel
very
strongly
about
as
a
community
working
with
the
residents
of
the
neighborhood,
was
to
maintain
parking
kind
of
raised
parking.
It's
not
effectively
a
garage,
but
it
is
elevated
parking
to
allow
for
enough
parking
below
the
surface
of
the
senior
building
to
support.
You
know
making
sure
that
we
can
get
cars
off
the
street
cheney
is
a
very
dense
street.
As
you
know,
you're
well
aware-
and
members
of
the
community
spoke
very
much
about
that.
S
So
I
would
like
to
say
that
we
believe
that
we're
in
a
very
strong
place
with
the
community
we're
going
to
continue
to
work
with
the
community,
but
I
do
think
that
unfortunately,
covent
didn't
allow
for
there
to
be
some
substantive
conversations
about
the
site.
We've
since
had
those
since
the
board
hearing
in
december.
A
Okay,
and
can
you
tell
us
how
dropoff
will
pick
will
happen
for
the
elders.
S
Sure
so
we
have
designed
the
building
such
that
the
ground
level
below
the
surface
of
the
just
adjacent
to
the
parking
lot
has
elevator
access
and
primary
entrance
so
park.
Cars
can
pull
off
of
chaney
street
drive,
pull
into
the
parking
area
here
as
you're,
seeing
it
and
seniors
can
be
easily
and
accessibly
access
the
building,
I
think
that's
a
huge
improvement
with
the
elevator
access
along
with
a
nice
vestibule
for
the
accessible.
S
A
S
S
S
S
We
fully
expect
that
this
will
be
an
age
and
dignity
site
where
we
will
have
adequate
open,
open
space
as
well
as
indoor
community
space
for
for
all
of
us
who
are
pushing
the
silverwave.
A
Okay,
nice,
okay,
is
anybody
here?
How
are
the
plans,
mr
robinson.
K
The
the
plans
look
good,
I
I
was
not
seated
at
the
last
time
this
came
through
and-
and
I
think
it's
actually
quite
nicely
stepping
along
the
street-
and
I
think
the
the
van
access
in
sort
of
on
a
sort
of
quiet
place
is
a
very
nice
aspect
to
it.
So
I
think
it
no
questions.
I
think
it's
quite
a
nice
proposal.
Thank
you.
CM
Good
afternoon,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board
jason
gent
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services.
So
this
was
a
vpda
facilitated
process.
But,
as
was
highlighted
on
the
last
time
that
they
were
before
the
board,
they
were
supposed
to
go
back
out
and
reach
out
to
the
community
which
they
have
done
at
the
sonona
sonoma
maple
and
shiloh
street
neighborhood
association
meeting
on
january
3rd,
and
then
they
hosted
their
own
meeting
for
the
neighborhood
to
attend.
On
february.
22Nd
they've
also
been
before
project
right
numerous
times
and
also
most
recently
garrison
charter.
Neighborhood.
AP
CM
I
believe
that
was
sent
over
the
conditional
sport
was
just
primarily
highlighting
the
fact
that
they
do
want
to
continue
working
with
jpnbc
around
the
number
of
units
and
just
making
sure
that
it
is
conducive
to
what
the
neighborhood
would
like
to
see
and
jpndc
has
confirmed
that
they
would
definitely
continue
those
communications
and
then
also
cc
myself
with
those
as
well.
So
we
are
going
to
be
deferring
to
the
expertise
of
the
board
for
this
matter.
Thank
you.
O
Thank
you
thank
you
and
I'm
trying
to
a
few
raised
hands.
We
also
have
a
letter
from
that.
Just
came
in
the
afternoon,
but
from
counselor
fernandez,
anderson
mejia,
we'll
see
they
sent
one
letter
in
support
of
the
proposal.
O
It
should
have
been
sent
to
an
email
but
I'll
open
it
up
to
the
floor
as
well.
Mike,
do
you
want
to
start?
Can
you
state
your
name,
and
I
just
for
the
record,
please.
BP
Yes,
my
name
is
michael
kosu
of
project
wright
320
the
letter,
a
blue
avenue
we
are-
we've,
been
engaged
with
jp
ndc
for
a
couple
year
process
of
getting
a
budding
and
nearby
residents
involved
in
this
process.
Clearly,
we've
worked
through
a
number
of
issues.
We
want
to
continue
to
work
through
these
issues
as
we
go
forward,
so
we're
looking
forward
to
continuing
this
process
and
we
will
work
closely
as
we
move
forward.
Thank
you.
CC
We
just
want
to
thank
the
board
for
the
opportunity
to
meet
again
and
have
to
have
the
time
to
meet
with
the
jp
and
defeat
work
out
the
issues
I
think
we've
come
to
a
resolution,
that's
workable
for
all
sides
and
and
mostly
on
behalf
of
the
seniors,
who
will
be
occupying
the
space
and
for
the
residents
in
the
community,
and
I
think
that
this
type
of
interactive
communication
can
work
for
other
projects
if
we're,
if
given
the
time
so
thank
the
board
and
we're
in
support
of
the
proposal,
which
is
have
been
written
up
and
supported
dnd
for
calling
the
last
meeting
on
this
project.
CC
AC
Hi
soledad
boyd
for
nazing
court
dorchester02121.
AC
I
am
here
in
support
of
the
project
thanks
very
much
to
the
jp
dc
for
continuing
to
listen
to
the
community.
As
someone
who
is
reaching
that
elderly
planning
stage,
I
am
in
full
support
of
this
project
and
believe
that
it
will
provide
much
needed,
affordable
senior
housing
as
well
as
community-wide
housing,
and
I
appreciate
everyone
for
digging
in
and
staying
with
the
process.
CN
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
I
apologize
for
not
speaking
before
I
had
stepped
out.
This
is
michael
jordano
from
maya's
office.
The
representative
was
very
pleased.
The
developers
and
the
community
were
able
to
meet
and
negotiate
an
agreement
on
this
project
and
would
like
to
go
on
record
in
support
of
both
of
the
cheney
street
jp
dc
projects
proposed
today
contingent
upon
the
continued
and
active
engagement
with
residents
and
other
leaders
in
the
community.
Thank
you.
CF
Yes,
good
afternoon
jessica
portrayed,
I'm
the
deputy
director
for
housing
development
at
the
mayor's
office
of
housing
wanted
to
speak
in
support
of
this
project
and
jpndc's
efforts
to
create
affordable
senior
housing,
affordable
home
ownership
and,
as
they've
discussed
on-site
pace,
senior
services
for
both
residents
of
the
building
and
the
surrounding
neighborhood.
CF
We
are,
as
others
have
said,
we're
really
encouraged
by
jp
dc's
efforts
to
engage
with
members
of
the
surrounding
community
with
with
members
of
local
neighborhood
associations
and
their
work,
especially
their
work
with
project
wright
and
garrison
trotter
neighborhood
association
and
the
butters.
We
are
enthusiastic
about
their
commitment
to
continue
to
work
with
these
folks
jessica.
BW
O
You
thank
you.
Kamala
go
ahead.
BC
BC
A
Second,
all
those
in
favor,
aye,
aye,
any
opposed
motion
carries.
May
I
suggest
miss
ellis
and
to
continue
your
conversations
with
the
community
so
that
everything
stays
on
track.
Okay,
good
luck,
ma'am
thank.
S
E
E
The
violations
article
65
section
8,
a
multi-family
residential
dwelling
use-
is
forbidden.
Article
65,
section
9.
The
florida
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
65,
section
9,
the
height
requirement,
is
accessible
stories
in
article
65,
section
42.2,
conforming
with
existing
front
alignment
of
the
block
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
AK
AK
Mr
fortune,
I'm
sorry
could
we
request
a
later
date.
I
think
that
we
may
also
wish
to
revise
plans.
E
Okay,
we
can
do
524.
AK
That
who's.