►
From YouTube: Zoning Board of Appeal Hearings 07-11-17
Description
Zoning regulates the use and dimensional boundaries of privately owned buildings and land. The Zoning code is in place to protect the neighborhoods from the construction of buildings or structures that do not fit into the context of a neighborhood. The Zoning Board of Appeal hears appeals for varying the application of the Zoning Code and determines when it is appropriate to grant deviations from code restrictions.
A
B
Morning,
the
Board
of
Appeals
for
Tuesday
July,
11
2017,
is
now
in
session.
Let
me
start
off
with
a
reminder
that
all
conversations
should
be
taken
out
of
the
room
very
difficult
for
us
to
hear,
with
the
with
the
echoes
and
the
and
the
acoustics
in
this
room,
in
conformance
with
the
Open
Meeting
Law.
This
is
to
remind
you
that
this
meeting
is
being
live-streamed
and
will
be
available
online
subsequent
to
this
meeting.
B
For
those
of
you
who
are
here
for
the
first
time
and
as
a
reminder
to
people
who
are
who
have
been
here
before,
please
when
you
are
here
to
speak
on
a
project
put
your
name
and
address
on
the
record,
this
board
makes
an
independent
decision.
We
take
advice
from
the
VRA
and
from
the
community
process
and
from
the
mayor's
office.
So
use
your
opportunity,
while
you're
up
here
to
give
us
new
information.
There
is
no
new
information,
just
put
your
name
and
address
on
the
record.
B
C
C
D
D
Were
asking
for
an
extension
because
we'd
like
to
move
forward
with
the
project
it
took
us
a
while
to
get
a
bid
that
was
acceptable
to
the
owner
went
through
a
bidding
process
in
the
spring
of
2016
was
very
hard
to
get
a
bid
at
that
time
the
number
wasn't
satisfactory.
So
we
start
the
process
again
February
and
completed
the
contract
process
with
the
contractor
and
look
at
the
big
project.
Pleaseno
wasn't
a
big
project,
but
we
really
wanted
to
be
on
budget.
C
F
F
Today's
request
is
that
the
board
had
previously
approved
a
fourth
floor
and
deck
for
this
structure,
the
deck
being
a
roof
deck
being
12
by
16
and
a
fourth
floor
being
16
by
18.
We're
asking
the
board
to
approve
a
flight
revision
to
the
plan
to
reduce
the
size
of
the
deck
from
12
by
16
to
6
by
16
and
slightly
increased
the
size
of
the
proposed
fourth
floor,
an
additional
8
feet,
making
it
28
by
16.
F
B
That
sounds
to
me
that
it's
we
did
have
a
cap
on
it,
and
plans
were
approved.
It
sounds
like
this
might
be
actually
more
appropriately
here
as
a
new
appeal,
because,
because
we've
basically
capped
the
FA
are
at
1.8
on
our
approval
of
the
plans.
When
you
were
here
before
us,
any
questions
from
the
board
yeah
not.
G
Much
a
question
just
a
comment.
My
concern
is
that
notion:
voice,
mine
Alaric
is
getting
out
of
control.
What,
when
Harbor
is
not
defined
previously
defined,
is
to
take
a
look
at
the
minimis
issues
that
come
up
often
times
in
the
design
review
process
or
otherwise,
but
when
this
is
a
simply
quietly
I
mean
the
or
the
accident
the
other
developer
came
before
us,
and
now,
when
you
have
a
better
idea
for
whatever
to
add
more
swiftly
and
more
value
to
the
project
I,
should
we
do
not
typically
final
issue?
G
G
C
H
I
B
J
Good
morning,
Commissioner
boy,
my
name
is
Michael
Atwood
from
Haley
&
Aldrich,
with
the
engineering
firm,
representing
170
Beacon
Street,
we're
here
to
request
conditional
use
permit
for
the
ground
water
conservation,
overlay,
district,
recharge
system
fight
plan
has
been
filed
with
Boston
Water
and
Sewer.
It's
currently
being
reviewed.
The
no
impact
letter
has
been
submitted
to
the
groundwater
trust.
G
G
I
B
I
M
N
C
C
B
C
O
Requesting
a
deferral
today,
our
office
was
involved
with
the
previous
owner
in
this
project
and
only
found
out
that
they
still
wish
to
the
new
owner
still
wish
to
retain
us
last
week.
Who
would
like
some
time
to
go
over
the
process
from
where
we
left
off
in
our
last
representation
into
where
it
is
today?.
B
P
C
C
C
The
violations,
article
53
section,
56,
our
street
parking,
three
section:
eight
multi-family
residential,
is
forbidden
in
a
two
f200
sub
district
article
53
section
I
on
excessive
fa,
our
article
53
section,
nine,
excessive
number
of
stories,
article
53,
excessive
building,
height,
453,
section,
nine,
insufficient
front
yard
setback
and
article
53,
section,
nine,
insufficient,
brea
setback
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
good.
Q
Morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
Richard
Lenz
1216
Beddington
Street
these
spots
on
behalf
of
the
petitioner
Condor
Creek,
Realty
LLC,
with
means
Ben
Goodman,
was
the
principal
of
the
owner
of
the
property
a
madam
chair.
This
is
a
existing
industrial
commercial
site
located
on
Condor
Street,
which
is
just
outside
of
Eagle
Hill
in
Boston.
Our
proposal
is
to
demolish
the
existing
garage,
which
has
been
used
for
various
auto
repair
type
uses
and
garage
uses
and
proposed
a
six
unit,
residential
building
with
parking
for
60
of
those
located
grade.
Q
This
proposal
would
add
a
total
of
six
two-bedroom
units,
all
two-bedroom
two-bath,
approximately
1,200
square
feet
each.
We
did
have
an
opportunity
to
present
this,
the
Eagle
Hill
Civic
Association.
On
two
occasions.
We
did
make
some
modifications
to
the
roof
where
we
had
a
proposed
head
house
with
access
up
to
a
roof
deck.
Based
upon
some
of
the
comments
from
the
neighbors,
we
adjusted
the
proposal
to
address
some
of
their
concerns
over
the
height
overall.
Q
The
neighborhood
supported
this
proposal
based
upon
the
elimination
of
the
industrial
commercial
you,
which
is
not
very
compatible
with
the
surrounding
neighborhood
surrounding
residential
neighborhood.
With
respect
to
the
relief
that's
necessary,
this
is
in
a
two
f2000
district.
The
minimum
lot
size
is
2,000
square
feet.
We're
proposing
a
lot
of
forty
375
square
feet.
No.
Q
375
square
feet
so
would
be
a
conforming
lot,
its
non-conforming
respect
to
the
rear
yard,
the
height,
the
floating
ratio,
open
space
and
the
parking
which
is
1.5
per
unit
and
we're
proposing
one
per
unit.
I
would
submit
that
the
this
section
of
Eagle
Hill,
looking
on
Kandra
Street,
doesn't
necessarily
have
a
terrible
parking
problem
specifically
because
the
waterfront
is
located
on
the
opposite
side
of
the
street
and
there
are
no
residences
or
buildings
on
that
that
side.
So
parking
is
not
necessarily
a
difficult
issue
in
that
neighborhood.
Q
Q
Q
Q
B
R
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
vocal
group
on
the
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood
Services
would
like
to
learn
we're
going
support
of
his
proposal.
They
presented
to
the
hill
Civic
Association,
which
they
received
a
strong
support.
Also,
we
received
letters
from
the
director
butters
who
are
supporting
this
proposal
with
the
provisions
that
they
actually
great
to
remove.
The
head
house
also
add
something
around
the
property
and
to
work
with
the
director
butters
in
Reverse
to
lighten
on
the
back
of
the
property.
S
Q
Q
N
Q
Q
G
B
B
N
N
B
C
Next
case,
calling
boa
seven
one
zero,
two,
seven,
seven
six,
so
Lee
Street.
This
is
construction
of
a
single-family
residence.
Two
violations,
article
62
section
7,
1,
family
detached
dwelling-
is
forbidden.
Article
62,
section,
8,
usable,
open
spaces
insufficient
in
article
62,
section
8.
The
Reyat
is
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
B
B
Okay,
so
just
to
give
everybody
a
heads
up,
I'd
like
to
hear
full
information,
but
I
will
be
a
full
testimony
from
three
people
on
either
side
of
the
the
issue
that
and
that
excludes
elected
officials.
So
please,
in
the
meantime,
while
we're
hearing
the
merits
of
the
case,
please
think
think
through
who's,
going
to
speak
on
your
behalf
and
please
make
sure
the
speakers
cover
all
the
issues
that
are
of
interest
to
you
in
the
meantime,
counselor,
please
go
ahead
with
your
presentation,
good.
U
Morning,
by
way
of
brief
backgrounds,
our
family
acquired
six
solely
street
in
2014
and
obtained
all
appropriate
permits
to
demolish
the
existing
house
and
create
a
new
as
of
right,
fully
dimensionally,
conforming
row
house.
In
accordance
with
the
properties
row
house,
zoning
of
Rh
1500
as
part
of
that
permit
issuance
the
design
of
the
house,
was
thoroughly
reviewed
and
approved
by
the
VRA
subject
to
a
public
article.
Eighty
process,
the
board
heard
our
case
into
in
February
of
2016
I'm.
B
U
Oh
gee,
this
board
heard
our
case
in
February
of
2016.
As
our
directive
butter's
to
the
south
59
Warren
Street
challenged
the
issuance
of
our
building,
permit
the
Board
determined
on
an
interpretation
that
we
were
in
fact
a
row
house.
The
matter
was
appealed
by
59
Warren
and
the
Board's
decision
was
reversed
by
the
Superior
Court
in
November
of
2016.
U
No
other
abutters
were
involved
in
that
appeal.
We
since
revised
our
plans
and
are
pleased
to
inform
this
board
that
the
trustees
of
the
59
Warren
Street
condominium
association
have
sent
a
letter
to
the
board
indicating
that
they
do
not
object
to
the
relief
requested
here
today.
The
current
revised
plan
seeks
variances
for
use,
rear
yard
setback
and
usable
open
space.
Our
revised
proposal
ostensibly
represents
the
same
house.
What
changed
is
we're
proposing
to
build
it
somewhat
skinnier
and
deeper.
U
It
is
proposed
to
be
2.5
feet
from
our
common
boundary
line
with
59
Warren,
which
is
a
dimension
that
we
agreed
to
after
consultation
with
Commissioner
Christopher
and
the
ISD.
It
is
also
proposed
to
be
5
feet
deeper
than
originally
proposed
at
the
second
and
third
floors
and
10
feet.
Deeper
at
the
first
floor,
aside
from
the
conditions
that
could
that
give
rise
to
the
need
for
variances,
the
proposed
house
will
be
dimensionally
conforming
in
all
other
respects,
including
with
regard
to
its
height
and
floor
area
ratio.
U
The
rear
wall
and
southern
wall
of
the
proposed
home
are
generally
positioned
in
line
with
the
deepest
parts
of
those
same
walls
which
stood
previously
as
part
of
the
demolished
residence.
Indeed,
there's
less
constructed
volume
in
certain
areas
relative
to
the
home
that
stood
originally.
The
southern
wall
of
the
proposed
home
closest
to
59
Warren,
is
consciously
set
back
to
provide
reasonable
access
for
maintenance
of
the
59
Warren
wall
from
the
outside.
Excuse.
V
U
Is
required
is
15
feet
that
is
the
statutory
minimum
setback
from
the
rear
lot
line
when
constructing
new.
The
challenge
in
this
case
is
that
originally
the
house
was
approved
as
of
right
subject
to
that
15
foot
setback
from
the
rear
lot
line
what's
changed
is
that
we
received
the
curveball
in
the
form
of
the
Superior
Court
motion,
a
Superior
Court
decision,
which
said
that
we
were
enjoined
from
touching
the
wall
at
59,
Warren
Street,
in
an
attempt
to
balance
all
of
these
different
issues.
U
B
G
N
U
N
U
A
side
where
there's
a
2.5
terms,
what
led
to
the
cementation
in
the
first
place,
it
was
attached
by
a
gate
and
a
it
was
a
gate
and
a
small
roofline.
As
I
mentioned,
the
proposed
house
basic,
the
old
house
was,
was
a
type
of
an
L
effectively,
and
so
the
new
house
seeks
to
basically
close
the
L
simplistically.
So
we
are
at
the
deepest
points
of
the
house.
Previously.
U
N
U
U
W
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
Christopher
Breen
offs
neighborhood
services.
We
would
like
to
go
on
record
and
support.
The
applicant
has
completed
a
full
community
process
and,
after
viewing
numerous
letters,
written
both
support
and
opposition
to
the
variance
request,
we
are
confident
supporting
their
relief
from
the
rowhouse
district.
The
project
will
be
owner-occupied
and
we
believe
that
the
applicant
will
work
with
the
abutters
in
the
child
community
going
forward.
Thank
you.
S
S
Is
a
family.
That's
trying
to
move
build
a
house
within
family.
We
have
seen
all
over
the
city.
They
are
coming
to
sue,
that
buying
up
one
family
houses,
they're
tearing
them
down
and
therefore,
in
three
or
more
condoms,
he's
finally
built
a
house
for
his
family
I've
been
down
there.
Looking
at
the
site,
I
just
can't
understand
the
opposition,
so
I
want
to
go
record
support
like
the
mayor's
office
settings
and
the
owner
occupancy
he's
a
live
in
Charlestown
he's
invested
his
family
in
Java.
So
please.
X
X
My
concern
here
is
that
that
this
is
taking
a
long
time
and
talking
about
a
family
house,
we've
dealt
with
50
munich
condos
quicker
than
this
just
and
we
have
a
hole
in
the
ground
in
our
community
right
now,
it's
not
going
to
be
built
like
it
was
it's
not
going
to
happen
gentleman's
trying
to
build
a
house
for
his
family.
It's
important
to
us.
He
went
to
our
process
demolition.
All
that
the
boy
you
know
the
boy
doesn't
take
Zoning
Board
vote,
which
we
only
opposed.
X
So
we
didn't
oppose
and
we
thought
it
was
going
to
happen
now.
It's
a
court
case.
It
was
a
court
case.
That's
a
long
time
as
a
member
of
the
Community
Council
sentence
inception.
This
is
one
of
the
longest
single-family
processes
that
we've
ever
dealt
with
and,
quite
frankly,
it's
a
hole
in
the
ground
that
has
something
has
to
be
built
and
I.
Think
if
a
family
wants
to
build
a
house
to
live
in
it,
we
support
it.
Thank
you.
Y
Good
morning,
madam
chair
and
members
of
the
board,
I'm
Karen,
Foley
and
I'm
here
on
behalf
of
Boston
City,
Councilor
at-large
and
the
suicide
be
George
councillor.
George
will
not
be
taking
a
position
of
support
or
opposition
on
this
case.
She
has
heard
from
a
number
of
constituents
on
this
matter
and
has
asked
me
to
convey
her
day
to
nix,
Theotis
and
his
family
for
the
efforts
to
keep
her
office
in
the
loop
throughout
this
process
and
to
thank
all
of
the
residents
of
soli
streets
and
other
neighbors
who
have
reached
out
to
birth.
Y
B
Z
AA
Good
morning,
madam
chairman,
madam
chairwoman,
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
David
Abbott
and
I'm,
with
Simons
Winslow,
Willis
and
Abbott,
and
on
behalf
of
John
and
Elaine,
she
and
owners
of
eight
solely
Street
or
direct
debuggers
of
the
property
I
rise
to
oppose
the
application.
First,
if
my
understanding
that
the
board
has
received
written
opposition
to
the
variances
requested
by
the
applicants
on
the.
AA
B
AA
We
understand
its
visitors
before
those
well,
madam
chair.
The
no
variance
can
be
issued
when
there
aren't
special
circumstances
or
conditions
affecting
the
lot
that
don't
affect
the
neighborhood
or
the
zoning
district
generally.
The
applicant
points
to
no
special
circumstances
or
conditions
pertaining
to
fix
only
Street.
The
there's
nothing
unusual
about
the
size
of
the
lot.
There's
nothing
unusual
about
the
topography
of
the
lot.
There's
nothing
unusual
about
the
configuration
of
a
lot.
That
alone
is
fatal
to
the
applicants
application
further,
there's
absolutely
nothing
that
the
out
can
point
to.
AA
That
would
suggest
that
the
literal
imposition
of
the
rear
yard
setback
and
usable
open
space
requirement
would
deprive
the
applicant
of
all
reasonable
use
of
the
property.
The
prior
house,
which
had
1985
square
feet,
existed
for
over
a
hundred
years
that
the
applicants
own
prior
plans
was
at
least
ten
percent
smaller
than
the
plans
that
are
before
you
today.
AA
So
that
alone
is
proof
positive
that
these
variances,
specifically
with
respect
to
the
rear
yard,
setback
and
usable
open
space,
are
not
required
in
order
to
make
sure
that
the
applicant
has
the
reasonable
use
of
their
property
further
there's
nothing.
No
variance
can
issue
unless
the
Board
finds
it
wouldn't
be
injurious
to
the
neighborhood.
We
have
again
180
signatures.
K
AB
B
AB
My
you,
a
reira
butter,
a
reira
butter,
okay,
yes,
my
property
spans,
the
entirety
of
600
extreme
I
purchased
the
home
in
August
of
2016.
When
the
plans
consisted
of
a
15
foot
setback,
we
reviewed
the
plans
before
purchasing
the
property.
We
were
happy
with
the
original
plans.
There
was
a
15
foot
setback,
which
obviously
is
what
we
would
like
to
see
toward
my
life
savings
into
the
home.
We
own-
and
you
know,
I'm
sad
to
stand
here
today
with
my
value
of
my
property
at
risk
over
a
very
marginal
step.
AB
Back
to
my
home,
it's
incredibly
invasive
to
me,
my
tooth,
my
husband,
my
small
children,
and
it
just
creates
an
incredible
hardship
for
our
family
to
have
a
home
built
to
that
close
to
ours
and
I,
don't
think,
there's
any
denying
that
it
negatively
affects
the
value
of
my
property
that
I
poured
everything
that
I
have
into.
Thank
you
thank.
B
AC
Yes,
my
name
is
Tom
Moselle
I
live
at
48,
Monument
Square,
which
is
at
the
top
of
salty
Street
and
I,
would
ask
the
board
to
consider
a
few
things.
Why
did
myself
included
about
189
people
signed
this
petition
opposing
the
property?
It's
a
matter
of
absolute
fairness
and
the
woman
who
spoke
ahead
of
me.
If
the
fairness
we're
talking
about
these
gases
have
the
option
right
now
under
law,
to
build
a
third
biggest
house
on
soli
street.
AC
They
can
exercise
that
right
and
god
bless
them,
but
why
they
feel
the
need
to
exceed
that
and
the
tarm
on
the
neighborhood,
to
the
extent
that
59
Warren
Street
had
to
spend
$100,000
to
defend
their
own
property
rights
which
were
held
up
in
court.
This
is
the
unfairness
we're
talking
about,
and
we
just
asked
we
be
heard.
I
mean
a
hundred
eighty
nine
people
took
the
time
to
read
and
sign
this
petition,
there's
a
reason
for
it,
but
we
want
fairness
and
the
other
thing
is
if
this
is
approved.
AD
K
C
B
AD
AD
I
just
wanted
to
build
on
a
few
points
were
actually
made
earlier
by
mistress,
Giada
first
and
some
of
the
points
that
were
actually
made
in
support
of
his
his
plan.
First
of
all,
he
specifically
mentioned
amended.
It
was
specifically
mentioned
on
several
occasions
how
long
this
is
taken.
That
was
actually
his
choice
tonight.
B
AD
So
we
live
it.
It's
a
pencil
industry
and
the
hydro
facility,
including
the
roof
deck,
would
invade
our
privacy
of
our
back
patio.
Our
home,
along
with
the
home
that
he
tore
down,
was
one
of
three
homes
that
was
moved
in
1850
to
this
location,
so
had
his
orally
affected
the
value
of
our
home,
and
it
will
be
much
larger,
as
the
stated
before
than
any
of
the
other
homes.
I
think,
there's
only
one
other
home
on
the
entire
street
that
will
be
of
this
size.
B
E
C
AE
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name's
Daniel
Brennan,
50,
Holt
Road
and
over
handle
permits
and
licenses
for
Starbucks
I'm
here
to
seek
relief
for
a
conditional
use,
restaurant
with
takeout
for
a
new
Starbucks
copy.
Recently
they
closed
the
kiosk
over
in
the
Quincy
Market
location,
anticipating
this
new
store
so.
AE
B
AF
N
G
AG
B
C
This
is
developing
new
twenty
one
story:
one
hundred
sixty
three
hundred
eighty
thousand
square
foot,
176
residential
unit
building
with
retail,
on
the
ground
floor
and
below
grade
parking.
The
violation
is
article
32,
section:
nine.
She
caught
enforcement
article,
38
section
19,
Street
wall
height,
thirty,
eight
dash.
Nineteen
point:
two
is
excessive:
article
38
section:
seven,
the
building
height
is
excessive
article
38
section:
seven,
the
floor
da
ratio
is
excessive
in
article
38,
section,
18
residential
uses,
ground
level
is
conditional
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
J.
AH
AH
This
morning,
the
site
is
rather
small.
If
you
include
Lowell
Court,
which
is
a
private
way.
We
share
within
a
butter
that
fronts
at
48
oil
stone
it's
under
9,000
square
feet.
The
property
is
used
as
surface
parking.
It
actually
predates
the
parking
freeze
of
1973
and
goes
back
a
lot
farther
than
that.
If
you
look
at
the
Sanborn
maps,
this
is
basically
one
of
the
last
remnants
of
the
old
combat
zone,
hemmed
in
by
buildings
all
around
there
in
new
developments
to
the
south
and
east
by
Avalon
Bay
and
the
Kensington.
AH
AH
1500
1500
and
there's
no
on-site
parking.
However
I
do
want
to
clarify
that
there's
also
no
new
shadows
cast
on
Boston
Common.
This
was
very
important,
so
no
shadows,
the
zoning
relief
that's
necessary
for
the
project
ranges
from
a
conditional
use
permit
for
ground
water
conservation.
We
have
a
no
harm
letter
submitted
by
Haley
&
Aldrich
to
the
groundwater.
Trust
I
have
copies.
If
you
wanted.
AI
I
AH
AH
AH
AH
It's
an
odd
configuration,
even
though
it's
right
in
the
smack-dab
in
Midtown
and
then.
Finally,
although
there
is
going
to
be
retail
on
the
ground
floor
and
the
floor,
plate
is
quite
small.
We'll
need
ground
level
residential
uses
approved
by
conditional
use
with
that
I
turn
it
over
to
the
architect.
Then
we'll
come
back
for
questions.
AH
Normally
it's
170
feet
if
you
undergo
a
large
project
review,
I.
Think
technically.
If
we
include
the
screen
on
the
top
or
a
240,
let's
screen
on
the
top,
the
FA
are
will
be
exceeding
17
and
again,
if
you
go
through
large
project
review
in
Midtown
cultural
district,
I
think
you
can
do.
10
is
the
normal
and
then.
AH
AJ
AH
F
AK
AJ
G
B
AL
AM
AN
Good
morning,
madam
chairman,
my
name
is
Jill
Fitzpatrick
I
work
for
Saint
Francis
House
in
Boston,
and
we
are
in
support
of
this
project.
We
are
currently
in
negotiations
with
some
design
coordination
due
to
the
proximity
of
our
of
our
buildings,
located
at
48
oil
Stenstrom
within
the
st.
Francis
house
buildings,
but
I
am
speaking
up.
We
are
in
support
of
this
of
this
project
as
we
work
at
least
negotiations.
AO
A
A
A
AH
B
AN
A
E
C
AR
K
AR
AR
AS
B
B
AT
B
AS
AS
Summer,
so
to
give
you
some
background,
we
worked
with
the
homeowners
on
a
complete
renovation
of
their
house
that
was
finished
last
year.
All
required
permits
were
pulled
at
the
end
of
the
project
that
the
homeowners
requested
that
they
that
we
upgrade
their
existing
rear
deck
and
they
they
hired
the
services
of
an
outside
vendor
who
told
us
that
they
could
install
this
as
of
right
without
any
permits.
So
we
were
not
involved
in
the
process.
They
were
fabricating
and
indeed
installed
the
structure
themselves
for
the
violation
that
was.
B
AU
Ahead
so
I'm
chair
members
of
the
board
to
supper
with
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services.
We
held
a
butters
meeting
with
with
the
proponent
and
none
of
the
neighbors
came
out.
I
haven't
received
any
letters
of
concerns
other
than
the
fact
that,
where
we
met
with
them,
we
also
had
our
presentation
from
the
Civic
Association.
There
was
discussion
about
the
color
because
it
is
safe,
atop,
a
historically
protective
neighborhood
and
the
pergola
kind
of
stands
out
in
regards
to
the
other
properties
in
the
area.
AV
AV
AV
Concerns
that
we
shared
with
them
in
writing
and
I'll,
provide
this
record
over
here
is
that
the
white,
very
large
latticework
and
the
pergola
very
large
columns
is
out
of
touch
with
the
neighborhood
I.
Think
it's
very
appropriate
for
and
over
and
would
be
a
nice
garden
oasis,
but
we
don't
feel
that's
compatible
with
the
2x8
vlogs
that
make
up
the
historic
scent.
The
tall
neighborhood
district.
AV
AQ
Thank
you,
madam
chairman,
and
the
board.
My
name
is
Peter
McFarland
I've
owned
that
building
at
115
Sigma
tall
Street
for
50
years
my
grandparents
owned
40
buildings
in
1905.
My
father
was
an
appalling
oil
company.
Since
1935
I've
had
the
keys
to
8,000
buildings
from
the
Back
Bay
to
the
South
End.
There
is
nothing
in
any
alley
that
looks
like
that:
I'm
not
opposed
to
any
additions.
Any
roof
decks
I've,
never
posed
anything
in
the
50
years.
I've
lived
there,
but
this
I
oppose
because
it's
even
the
garbagemen
said
it
was
an
abomination.
AQ
I
don't
suggest
that
they
take
it
down
because
I'm
a
friendly
neighbor,
but
it
should
be
painted
black,
as
they
say,
Patel
Street
Commission,
because
it
looks
like
a
plastic.
It's
just
unbelievable.
Coming
down
as
I
showed
you
those
pictures
if
they
could
only
paint
it
black
or
tone
it
down,
it
would
be
just
fine.
Thank
you
so
much
thank.
G
G
AR
G
AR
N
N
N
B
AR
C
The
next
case
calling
boa
six
five,
six,
four
seven,
three
one
grace
cord.
This
is
building
two
new
stoop.
True
story:
Dec
the
article
violation,
article
17
section,
one
usable,
open
spaces,
insufficient
article
19,
section,
one
side:
yard
setback
is
insufficient.
An
article
20
section
long,
rail
yard
setback
is
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
morning.
L
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name's
George
Moran,
see
I'm
an
attorney
with
the
business
address
of
350,
West
Broadway
and
sell
BOTS
and
madam
chair
members.
This
is
an
exceedingly
simple
application.
One
graced
court
as
a
legal
for
family
dwelling
right
now
secondary
means
of
egress
from
the
two
second
floor
units
is
via
an
outdated
code,
non-compliant
fire
escape.
L
The
proposal
here
is
to
add
a
rear,
two-story
deck
structure,
which
will
collide
open
space
and
will
also
provide
compliant
means
of
egress
for
the
units
to
top
units,
in
particular,
the
the
the
deck
would
span
the
rear
width
of
the
building.
It
would
be
approximately
7
feet
in
depth
and
would
have
a
staircase
on
either
end
of
the
deck
providing
discharge
into
the
rear
yard.
In
terms
of
the
violations
this
application
was
filed
in
October
of
2016.
L
It
is
hence
cited
under
the
base
code
and
in
our
point,
8
district.
There
are
3
cited
violations,
insufficient
usable,
open
space.
The
fact
is
that
the
structure
of
the
stairs
do
displace
some
of
the
former
usable
open
space.
Hence
the
violation.
However,
that
is
more
than
compensated
for
in
terms
of
the
open
space
provided
on
two
levels
by
the
new
deck
is.
L
L
AW
AL
E
B
C
L
Name
is
George
Moran,
see
I'm
an
attorney
with
the
business
address
at
350
West
Fargo
in
South
Boston.
Madam
chair
members,
this
is
an
article
80
small
project.
It
has
not
yet
gone
before
the
VRA.
It
needs
to
be
deferred.
My
anticipation
or
hopeful
anticipation
is
this
might
be
ready
for
VRA
action
in
October.
Perhaps
September,
therefore,
I
would
aim
for
something
at
the
end
of
September.
Maybe
the
last
meeting
of
that
month
is
possible.
I
just.
L
B
B
AX
AX
Attorney
mix
Azula
McDermott
Cody,
Miller,
28,
State,
Street,
Suite
8:02
here
in
Boston,
madam
chair
we've
had
several
of
our
meetings
with
the
mayor's
office.
We
met
with
the
Jamaica
Plain
Neighborhood
Council
zoning
committee
last
week
on
July
5th
they've
asked
us
to
defer.
We
need
some
more
time
to
work
through
the
project
with
the
abutters.
AX
AK
C
C
B
AZ
This
is
the
redevelopment
of
the
older
commercial
building
at
40,
47
53
Farnsworth
Street,
just
up
against.
If
you
will
seaport
Boulevard
on
the
4-point
side,
the
proposal
is
to
create
a
new
retail
home
and
flagship
for
Trillium,
which
is
liked
by
many
accounts.
The
premier
craft
brewery
in
the
city
of
Boston,
known
for
its
products
literally
around
the
country
and.
N
AZ
Tables:
okay,
right,
just
the
board
knows
just
a
process
on
Congress
Street
is
their
original
position.
If
you
will
it's
a
very
small
facility,
they
actually
grew
most
of
their
product
outside
of
the
city
and
a
large
facility.
This
will
provide
them
with
a
place
for
the
public
to
enjoy
the
product.
Have
dining
experience?
Have
some
brewing
growing
experiences
a
roof
deck
proposed
for
dining
in
an
outdoor
patio?
We
did
have
a
very
positive
meeting
four
point:
neighbor
Association
and
the
mr.
Allison
was
present.
AZ
AZ
AW
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
John
Ellis
and
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood
Services,
we'd
like
to
on
record
and
support,
as
the
proponents
know,
that
they
have
met
with
the
Fort
Point
neighborhood
association
and
received
support,
and
this
is
a
use
that
already
exists
in
the
neighborhood.
Thank
you.
AL
AO
G
E
C
Call
your
next
case
calling
vo
a
6
7
3
3
4
3
4,
88
f3.
This
is
a
complete
remodel
of
an
existing
2
family.
In
addition,
tube
of
and
to
the
side
and
change
are
three
to
three
units.
The
violation
is
article
14,
section,
14
2
la
tarea.
Traditional
drawing
unit
is
insufficient
article
15
section
1,
the
40
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
17,
section
1,
the
usable
open
space
is
insufficient.
Article
18
section
1,
the
front
yard
requirement
is
insufficient.
Article
19
section
1,
the
side
yard
requirement
is
insufficient.
C
L
The
blue,
my
name,
is
George
Moran
CM
attorney
with
the
business
address
at
350
West
Broadway
in
South
Boston
I'm
joined
by
James
Christopher
of
RCA,
architects
of
for
15
to
pancit
Avenue
in
Dorchester
to
project
architects.
Madam
chair
members,
this
is
an
application
to
erect
a
side
addiction
to
an
existing
two
family
structure
at
88,
F,
Street,
corner
of
88
I'm.
Sorry,
the
corner
of
F
Street
and
West.
First
Street
in
South
Boston
I,
pointed
out
for
the
record
that
the
application
was
submitted.
L
November
10
2016
the
results
that
the
refusal
letter
cites
the
the
premises,
basecode
zoning
of
the
time
h,
150
a
revised
set
of
plans
submitted
today
from
what
was
originally
submitted.
Being
section
inspectional,
Services
Department
depicts
the
building
and
the
addition.
Without
a
roof
deck,
there
were
two
roof
decks
on
the
original
application.
During
the
community
process
there
was
some
objections
raised
to
potential
roof,
roof
decks
and
these
roof
decks
have
been
removed
from
the
plan
better
before
the
board.
Maran.
L
L
Rail
yard
said
the
rear
yard
setback
violation.
The
new
addition
is
is:
is
it
being
erected
to
the
left
of
the
building
on
what
is
a
separately
assessed
parcel
the
new
addition
actually
is
compliant
in
terms
of
rear
yard
setback.
The
existing
building
has
an
existing
nonconformity
with
respect
to
regret,
setback
that
isn't
being
changed.
L
K
B
L
The
first
page,
what
was
submitted
to
the
board
is
the
certified
block
plan.
So
again
you
can
see
that
the
addition
on
the
left
is
compliant
with
respect
to
reroute
setback.
The
the
existing
building
is
being
extended
vertically,
but
not
to
the
rear.
The
footprint
is
not
changing
with
respect
to
the
other
violations
again,
there's
a
lot
size
violation
as
the
cited
in
H
150,
which
requires
five
thousand
square
feet
minimum
lot
size.
This
combined
law
is
2200
six
square
feet,
there's
an
F
AR
violation
and
resulting
if
they
are
here,
is
2.26.
L
There
is,
in
fact,
no
side
yard
required
for
the
first
70
feet
of
lot
depth
and
in
H
150,
there's
a
rear
yard
insufficiency,
as
we
talked
about
at
the
very
beginning.
The
addition
is,
in
fact,
compliant
with
very
odd
setback.
The
existing
buildings
in
existing
buildings,
inadequate
setback,
is
not
being
increased.
So,
finally,
we
are
cited
for
not
street
parking
insufficiency
because
to
tandem
spaces
are
being
closed
so
to
tandem
spaces
in
the
garage
total
of
four
cars,
because
they
are
in
fact
tandem.
AW
AL
BA
Jacobson
249
West,
fifth
Street
and
I'm
a
director
butter
both
behind
their
health
because
they're
on
a
corner
and
I'm
on
a
different
Street
and
the
back
of
my
house
about
their
property.
I
am
completely
unaware
of
any
abutters
meetings
that
has
been
held.
The
first
time,
I
heard
about
any
plans
they
had
was
when
I
got
a
postcard
from
your
office.
I
have
letters
from
two
other
abutters
with
me
today,
who
weren't
able
to
be
here.
BA
BA
BA
I
am
nervous,
I'll,
let
you
know
I've
never
done
this
before,
for
one
thing
that
they
haven't
mentioned
is
there
are
two
lots
eighty-six
mediate.
You
just
mentioned
that
86
F
Street
was
purchased
from
the
city
of
Boston
as
part
of
the
yard
sale
program,
and
so
there
are
some
deed
restrictions
that
I'm
not.
BA
They
are
trying
to
add
not
just
make
the
two
families
much
bigger
but
add
a
three-bedroom
unit
both
to
the
side
and
raising
even
higher
than
this
property.
Already
goes
so
I'd
like
to
see
this
being
examined
in
light
of
the
fact
that
1115
square
foot
strip
at
86
is
actually
was
purchased
from
the
city
of
Boston
as
part
of
yard,
sale
and
I,
don't
think
making
a
profit
on
building
us.
Yet
a
third
home
is
what
was
intended
by
that
program.
BA
BA
BA
That
today
are
on
that
they're
building,
something
that's
far
too
large
for
the
space.
Okay,
it's
it's
so
I,
don't
know
all
the
terminology
to
floor
area
ratios
and
they're
way
over
the
max
okay,
they're,
adding
a
whole
nother
Yuna
three-bedroom
unit
and
an
air
is
very
congested
already.
The
parking
plan
is
completely
insufficient
for
this
many
unit.
There
are
already
are
some
spots
there,
they're
not
adding
any
and
they're
tandem.
So
you
can't
pull
in
and
out.
You
wouldn't
be,
there's
no
way
to
make
spots.
BA
You
can
go
in
and
around
you
don't
have
I,
don't
know
how
many
spots
they're
legally
needs
to
be
I
know
there
were
increases
recently,
something
about
1.5
per
unit.
There's,
hopefully
an
adequate
on
that,
but
they
also
want
to
build
a
wall.
I
want
to
extend
the
wall
at
the
back,
there's
a
non-conforming
shed.
That
sticks
out
from
the
first
floor
about
four
feet
and
really
is
right,
like
few
inches
from
the
property
line,
but
then,
on
the
second
floor,
it
isn't
like
that
it's
only
like
39
feet
back.
BA
The
first
floor
is
about
44
feet
back.
The
second
floor
is
about
39
feet
from
front
to
back,
leaving
four
feet
between
my
property
line.
In
it
the
way
I
read
their
plans,
they're
trying
to
build
a
wall
they're
trying
to
grandfather
in
that
there's
one
little
part:
that's
non-conforming
on
the
first
floor
and
make
the
whole
thing.
Non-Conforming
I
write
at
the
property
line
when
I
look
at
the
measurements
that
I
have
seen
in
the
plan
where.
AO
BA
BA
If
you
don't
mind
me
reviewing
my
note,
they
are
adding
a
full
third
story.
Yes,
where
there
really
isn't
one
now
again
like
I
made
a
quarter
of
the
roof,
has
a
storage
room
on
the
top,
so
when
they
want
to
make
it
four
feet
closer
to
my
property
line
and
write
on
my
property
line
and
I
windows
on
that
side,
that
I
have
a
third
floor.
I
have
a
single-family.
It's
going
to
block
the
light
to
our
bedrooms
on
the
third
floor,
block
our
view
of
Dorchester
Heights
Monument.
BA
B
L
B
B
Incorporation,
the
proposed
incorporation
of
clarifies
is
its
incorporate,
incorporating
a
shed
or
whatever
it
is
into
the
design
to
claim
that
real
yard.
Yes,.
L
Dnd
restrictions
under
the
relevant
program
prohibit
the
use
of
the
land
in
question
for
anything.
Besides,
a
storage
tool
sheds
a
garden
shed
structure
is
usually
what's
referred
to.
Austria
parking
and,
in
fact,
in
addition
to
the
building,
DND,
would
need
to
issue
a
certificate
compliance
because
of
the
restriction
they're
routinely
granted.
This
is
an
addition
to
an
existing
building
which
conforms
to
the
program
requirements
in
question.
With
respect
to
the
issue
of
the
rear-projection
CDX,
four
of
has.
N
L
They
typically
don't
look
at
it
until
if
and
when
it's
approved
by
the
board.
I
wanted
to
bury
in
situation.
Mr.
Ehrlich
ex4
shows
the
forth
in
the
side.
Elevation
shows
the
course
of
the
building
in
the
rear.
That
extends
back.
That
would
in
fact
be
squared
off.
It
would
go
up
the
maximum
height
of
the
building
is
zoning
compliant
thirty
two
and
a
half
feet.
L
It's
not
a
lot
less,
but
it's
actually
about
a
foot
less
than
the
existing
maximum
a
high
point
of
the
roof,
which
is
that
partial
third
story
in
terms
of
the
the
unit's
they
are
in
fact
of
two
bedroom
units.
Reference
was
made
to
a
three-bedroom
unit
there.
In
fact,
three
two
bedroom
units
and
again
in
terms
of
size
and
density
of
the
building.
The
FA
are,
is
two
point:
two
six
high
thirty
two
and
a
half
feet.
I,
don't
know
what
to
say
on
that.
C
Voa
six
eight
five,
four
four
639
Washburn
Street:
this
is
a
wreck
tinu
three
family
residential
dwelling
on
a
vacant
lot
construct
balconies
and
roof
deck
through
a
head
house
violations;
article
60
section
for
tre
packing
article
60,
section,
41.1
conformity
when
an
existing
building
alignment.
Article
60
section
nine
lot
areas
insufficient
article
60,
section:
nine
loss
frontage
is
insufficient.
Article
60
section.
Nine
lot
width
is
insufficient.
Article
60
section
I
on
the
floor:
tear
ratio
is
excessive.
BB
O
Dirty
tooling
and
cherry
just
antidote,
the
clerk
he
does
provide
stated
Ryan,
we're
proposing
here
in
the
erection
of
a
free
family
home
on
three
levels,
each
unit
or
consists
of
two
bedroom.
The
upper
tube
for
these
two
and
three
as
to
best
buy
the
lower
floor
is
a
violently
agree
that
the
by
level
is
up
is
a
product
of
the
neighborhood
community
profits.
O
B
O
B
N
N
O
BD
BE
B
AH
K
C
BF
BF
Q
BF
BF
B
BF
BF
BF
AW
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
John
Ellis
and
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services,
we'd
like
to
go
on
record
in
strong
support.
We
did
hold
in
a
butters
meeting
and
the
project
is
very
well
received.
This
is
consistent
with
many
decks
in
the
area
and
it
is
just
preparing
a
deck
that
is
already
existing.
Thank
you.
BF
C
C
B
B
S
BH
10
feet
is
requirement.
The
existing
is
just
under
8
feet.
It's
an
existing
condition,
there's
an
existing
curb
cut
from
long
time.
Back.
Current
driveway
is
used
for
access
backyard
and
pull
off.
In
the
event
the
storm
we're
proposing
an
addition,
bedroom
addition
for
the
third
generation
bikinis
and
the
requirement
is
that
there
be
two
spaces
in
order
to
access
those
two
spaces.
We
need
a
driveway
the
configuration
of
existing
building
Bob
with.
AW
AL
Chair
members
of
the
board,
Lauren
Miller
City,
Council
dill
winning
hands
off
as
we,
which
is
one
record
and
strong
support.
There
was
no
opposition
at
the
abutters
meeting
and
this
is
a
longtime,
healthy
family.
That's
trying
to
build
build
in
addition
for
their
son,
so
would
like
to
vehicle
/.
Thank
you,
then.
BI
C
The
last
case
for
9:30
calling
boa
seven
zero
one.
Five
six
zero
six
st.
Margaret
Street
is
also
building
code.
Boa
seven
zero
one:
five,
six,
one
sixteenth
Margaret
Street:
this
is
a
change
our
tune
for
one
family
to
a
two
family
house.
No
work
is
to
be
done.
The
violation
is
article
65,
section,
nine
usable,
open
spaces,
insufficient
nautical
65
section
nine
Reyat
is
insufficient.
This
is
both.
C
AK
B
AW
K
C
B
C
The
next
case,
at
ten
thirty
calling
boa
six
nine
three,
eight
four
nine
four
forty
one
shammed
Avenue
this
is
to
install
a
new
roof
deck
violations.
Article
64
section
9,
a
townhouse
row
house
extensions
into
a
yacht
above
the
birth
story,
article
64,
section,
34,
restricted
roof
structure,
regulations
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
Harry.
BK
BK
B
BL
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members,
the
boards
and
chambers
mayor's
offices,
Neighborhood
Services,
we
look
to
the
record
in
support.
We
held
at
the
bomb
and
a
butters
meeting
were
only
one
individual
was
in
attendance,
which
happens
to
be
the
Neighborhood
Association
president,
who
was
also
in
favor
of
his
proposals.
We
like
to
go
on
record
in
support.
Thank
you
very
much
is.
G
E
C
On
the
next
case,
calling
VOA
seven
one,
six,
five,
six
five,
forty
two
Glenn
way
Street.
This
is
directly
to
family
dwelling
violations.
Article
10
section
one
limitation
of
area
of
accessory
uses,
article
60,
section,
nine,
the
Florida,
a
ratio
is
excessive
article,
sixty
section
nine,
the
railyard
is
insufficient
article
sixty
section
fourteen
point:
four
off
street
parking
location,
article,
sixty
section
9
a
lot
areas,
insufficient
article
sixty
section,
forty-one,
60-40
one
point:
two:
traffic
visibility
across
the
corner
is
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
AM
AW
B
BN
G
C
Niceties
finally,
boa
six:
eight
three:
four:
five:
zero
fifteen
Wilson
Street
Wilson
Street
Hill.
Okay:
this
is
the
change
hikes
from
a
three
family
to
a
four
family
in
renovate
in
an
astrologer
inkless
system,
legalized
the
existing
condition.
The
violations
article
60
section
40
parking
is
insufficient
for
additional
unit,
an
article
60
section.
Eight,
a
multi-family
is
forbidden
in
a
three
f
6,000
sub-district.
C
V
B
V
B
V
B
AW
V
V
G
BL
C
Calling
you
next
case
calling
VOA
seven
one:
nine
five
one,
seven
two
sixty
five
Hancock
Street:
this
is
the
demo
an
existing
structure
and
building
new
construction
at
three
family
wood
frame
building
violations,
article
65
section
41
parking
is
insufficient.
Article
65
section
9
a
lotta
area's
insufficient
article
65
lots
width
is
insufficient.
Article
65
lot
frontage
is
insufficient.
Article
65
forty
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
65
maximum
stories
is
excessive.
Article
65
section
nine
Saigon
is
insufficient.
How
they
go.
Sixty-Five
section,
I
front
yard
is
insufficient.
BP
BQ
BP
Before
we
were
going
along
with
them
for
force
about
who.
C
N
B
C
C
BR
BR
BR
Hereit
one
will
be
about
a
thousand
square
feet.
2
bedrooms,
1
bath
unit
2,
will
be
approximately
1,300
square
feet,
2
beds,
one
and
a
half
baths.
We
had
community
on
June
8th.
We
had
an
abundance
meeting
sponsored
by
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services,
where
a
couple
of
letters
came
out
and
they
went
supported
the
project
a
father
at
this
time
and
take
any
questions
from
the
board.
BS
Morning,
madam
chair
members,
the
board,
my
name,
is
David
Carter
from
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services.
Let's
go
on
record
and
support
the
LD
abutters
meeting,
one
or
two
of
butter
showed
up
both
offering
support
I,
believe
this
house
was
a
two-family
in
the
not-too-distant
past,
and
it's
just
going
river
running
back
to
the
two
families
stuff
would
like
to
on
record
export.
Thank
you.
G
BO
BR
E
BR
BR
C
AR
BM
AK
BJ
G
AX
C
AX
Nix
Azula
McDermott
Kotian
miller,
28
State,
Street,
Suite,
8,
0
2.
Here
in
Boston,
we
were
in
front
of
the
board
on
May
23rd.
We
are
still
waiting
on
approval
of
plans
from
Boston
water
and
soar
for
the
ground
water
conservation.
This
was
a
fully
kelis
aport
at
a
community
project,
but
that's
a
technical
requirement
and
those
plans,
I've
been
told,
have
just
only
recently
been
filed
by
the
civil
engineer.
He
was
out
for
a
significant
period
of
time
due
the
holiday
and
I'm.
AX
B
M
E
E
B
C
C
This
is
to
erect
a
new
single-family
home.
The
violations
Article
67
section
32
insufficient
parking
to
unit
2
unit
is
required.
Article
67
section
9,
the
insufficient
lot
size
5,000
square
feet
is
required.
Article
67,
section,
9,
insufficient
front
yard
setback,
Article,
67,
section
9,
insufficient
rail
yard
setback,
25
feet
is
required
name
and
address
villa
record.
Please.
BT
BT
We're
proposing
single-family
residence
on
high
performance
housing,
actually
the
adjacent
to
the
clients,
parents
house,
and
he
grew
up
on
the
streets
and
I'm,
creating
semantics.
What
we're
proposing
a
compact,
1,600
square
foot
little
over
people
family
that
actually
keeps
the
scale
of
the
residence
to
size.
The
lot
and
the
variances
that
we
are
heating.
AY
AO
BT
BT
V
AV
G
AL
AG
BT
AP
BU
Morning,
madam
chair
members,
board
gamer
mayor's
office
and
neighborhood
services
like
to
go
on
record
of
support.
They
had
a
well
attended
community
meeting,
almost
unanimous
about
our
support,
despite
opposition
from
the
immediate
butter
in
the
rear.
So
it
asked
just
for
design
review
for
the
rear
yard
setback.
AR
C
Next
case
filing
vo,
a
six
nine
zero,
seven,
five,
five,
forty
one,
seventy
two
to
forty
one:
seventy
four
Washington
Street:
this
is
a
change
octi
and
conclude
a
retail
store.
Where
actually
consists
of
an
exterior
and
interior
renovation.
The
violations
Article
67
section
12
insufficient,
bring
out
step
back
ten
feet
as
required.
You
remove
your
cap,
sir.
AF
BG
K
BU
Afternoon,
madam
chair
members
board
a
mark,
the
mayor's
office,
Neighborhood
Services.
This
is
a
fairly
complex
issue
that
was
going
on
for
quite
some
time
started
with
initial
applications
that
were
applied
at
the
wrong
address.
This
was
six
to
ten
Murray
Hill
Road
and
for
conversations
with
inspectional
services.
They
reallocated
two
new
application
to
have
it
coincide
with
what
they're
actually
doing
at
Washington
Street,
but
as
the
developers
had
mentioned,
the
work
had
already
been
complete.
BU
B
B
BU
B
BV
C
B
L
BV
P
C
B
AC
BG
B
BB
BG
P
BG
BG
BG
All
stucco
brand-new
during
the
time
construction.
The
only
thing
I
was
asked
to
do
was
cancer,
your
essence
because
they
didn't
like
41-7
core
AMD,
so
it
was
confusing
for
Public
Safety.
They
condemn
address
musical
420
172
then,
before
that
they
asked
us
to
do
some
architectural
detail,
changes
as
the
corners
and
make
them
feel
they
could
look
a
little
nicer.
The
original
crime
during
that
whole
time
frame,
oh
seven
came
up
signing.
C
B
BW
B
G
BW
AU
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board
just
saw
Guerrero
with
the
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood
Services,
who
would
like
to
go
over
I
couldn't
support,
we
did
hold
on
a
butters
meeting
and
they
met
with
the
Civic
Association,
who
was
also
in
support
at
the
abutters
meeting.
There
were
several
concerns
just
in
regards
to
traffic
on
Beacon
Street,
and
they
proposed
possibly
putting
it
off
to
the
side
street
and
then
other
than
that.
No
other
concerns
have
been
raised.
Thank.
C
B
BI
C
B
C
The
companion
case
is
Bo
a
six
six,
two
two
two
four
one:
ninety
one
Condor
Street
Condor
street
here
there's
a
companion
case,
vo
a
6
to
2
2
to
11
Condor
Street.
This
is
for
191
Condor,
construct
new
9
unit,
residential
building
with
11
parking
spaces.
The
violation
is
article
53,
section
8,
the
MFR
and
the
pivot
is
forbidden
in
a
two-family
sub
district
article
53
section
9,
insufficient
rail
yard
setback,
article
53,
section
9
in
excess
of
FA.
Our
article
53
section
9
number
of
stories
allowed
height,
has
been
exceeded.
C
Article
53
section
I
on
the
front
yard
setback
is
insufficient:
illegal,
53,
section,
54,
screening
and
buffering.
None
is
proposed
now.
Therefore,
53
section
56
insufficient
blocking
article
53,
section,
57,
point:
3,
traffic
visibility
across
Qantas,
3
and
5
special
provisions
for
corner
Lots.
This
is
for
211
condoms
me.
C
People
to
build
a
new
14
unit,
building
with
14
parking
spaces,
the
violation
is
article
53,
section
9
excessive
FA,
our
article
53
maximum
height
alavés
exceeded
the
quarry
front
yard
setback
is
insufficient,
an
article
53
rail
yard
setback
is
insufficient,
53,
section
54
screening
and
buffering
then
is
proposed.
Article
53
section
56
insufficient
parking
in
article
52,
section
8,
Emma
fires
have
been
in
a
true
family,
sub
district
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
BX
Did
the
reason
we
were
deferred
a
lot
of
times,
because,
although
these
are
separate
projects,
not
contiguous
laws,
the
BPD
a
ask
the
applicant
to
voluntarily
submit
to
small
project
reviews
because
there's
a
lot
of
activity
on
this
particular
stretch
of
Condor
speed,
including
BPD,
a
owned
parcels.
We
wanted
us
to
sort
of
set
the
tone
for
future
developments
that
we
voluntarily
agreed
to
comply
with
public
review
c
v.
Pd
a
board
approval,
On,
June,
15
2000.
BX
BX
No,
the
privates
really
weren't
broken
up
one
at
2:11
contours
to
the
others,
about
ten
houses
down,
so
that
wasn't
the
issue,
but
nonetheless,
as
part
of
the
review
process.
Indeed,
there
are
three
units
being
provided
for
the
two
projects
and
holes
of
13%
of
the
total
members
include
started
with
23
will
be
set
aside
when.
BX
BX
R
AI
K
AM
BY
N
A
C
Thank
you.
Thank
you
calling
the
next
case
calling
boa
seven:
zero,
seven,
nine
seven,
two
eight
sixteen
Saratoga
Street.
This
is
two
new
bathrooms
new
window
and
roof.
When
violations
article
53,
section,
nine,
the
forty,
a
ratio
is
excessive,
basement
and
attic
areas
of
new
act,
occupied
areas
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
AI
B
For
the
record,
we
had
seen
this
project
at
the
subcommittee
meeting
last
month.
The
applicant
was
here
at
the
last
meeting.
However,
due
to
the
fire
alarm
process,
we
were
not
able
to
hear
this
case
and
the
only
reason
we
did
not
hear
it
at
the
subcommittee
is
that,
because
it's
not
owner
occupied
I
would.
AI
AI
AI
R
K
C
Following
next
case,
calling
boa
six
six
four
seven,
six:
three
eight
Clifford
Street,
I'm,
sorry
yeah,
eight
Clifford
street
there's
a
companion
case,
boa
six,
six,
four,
seven,
six,
two
one
Waverly
Street:
this
is
for
Clifford
Street.
This
is
the
construction
to
eighty
to
ninety
warrants.
We
construct
a
five-story
mixed-use,
commercial,
residential
building
of
approximately
eighty
four
thousand
seven
hundred
and
seventy
nine
square
feet.
There
will
be
74
underground
parking
spaces
on
a
32,000
square
foot
lot
occupancy
to
be
a
fifty
one,
residential
units
and
offices.
C
The
violation
is
article
50,
section,
29
lotta
areas,
insufficient
article
50,
section
29,
the
floor
area
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
50,
the
building
height,
is
excessive
article
50.
The
bill
and
height
number
of
stories
is
excessive.
Article
50
usable
open
spaces,
insufficient
article
50,
section
29,
the
front
yard
is
insufficient.
Article
56
to
29
side
yard
is
insufficient.
A
local
50
section,
29
Reyat
isn't
sufficient.
This
is
for
one
Waverly.
C
This
is
to
80
to
90
Warren
Street
constructed
mixed-use
commercial
residential,
approximately
56,000
square
feet,
including
28
underground
parking
spaces
on
a
38,000
square
foot,
lot
arguments
to
be
a
restaurant,
coffee,
shop
and
44
residential
units
with
underground
parking
violations.
Article
50
section,
29
law,
daenerys,
insufficient
article
50
floor
area
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
50
building
height
is
excessive.
Article
50,
section
29,
building
height
number
of
storeys
is
excessive.
Radical
50,
60
29
useable
open
spaces.
Insufficient
article
50
front
yard
is
insufficient.
C
BZ
You
very
much
mr.
secretary,
madam
T,
a
member
of
the
board.
My
name
is
Joseph
Feaster
from
the
law
firm
of
McKenzie
and
associates.
183
State
Street
was
the
last
0
to
1
0
9
July,
when
your
right
is
Edgar
career
from
the
clues
construction
company.
He
is
the
project
manager
on
this
gorgeous
project
and
setting
up
the
four
tiers,
our
architect,
Michael
Washington
of
Michael,
Washington,
architects
and
King.
BZ
That
is
here.
This
is
a
development
that
the
mention
coupe
development
cooperation
is
the
developer
of
this
project.
In
there
is
going
to
be
built
in
two
phases:
phase
one
will
be
a
four-story
building,
consisting
of
51
units
of
new
and
family
new
family
of
elderly
resident
two
housing
units.
They
will
also
be
a
7,000
towards
an
84
square
foot
commercial
space
to
be
occupied
by
food
development,
construction
and
management
staff
that
are
removing
their
office
to
that
particular
site
and
there
will
be
74
parking
spaces
in
a
two
level
garage
phase.
BZ
Two
of
the
of
this
project
will
be
a
five-story
building
consisting
of
forty
four
units
of
residential
housing,
and
with
that
there
is
discussion
as
to
what
type
of
housing
whether
it
be
elderly
or
not.
Not
elderly,
we'll
take
place
there,
but
that's
being
in
discussion
both
with
the
city
as
well
as
in
the
neighborhood,
and
also
financing
consideration,
so
that
second
phase
was
the
particular
type
of
housing
that
rotated
what
the
units
will
be.
It
will
be
housing,
yes,
but
what
the
units,
whether
they
will
be
only
imagine,
will
be
still
in
the
discussion.
BZ
There
will
be
a
4050
square
foot,
coffee
shop,
the
restaurant
and
there
we
28
the
parking
spaces
in
the
surface-level
garage.
The
property
will
consist
of
one
two
and
three-bedroom
units,
tenants,
storage
area
and
garage
parking.
The
project
went
before
the
Boston
Civic
is
about
design.
Commissioner,
was
approved
on
December
6
2016,
completed
operating
large
squads
of
review
on
December
16
2016
before
the
Boston
Planning
and
Development
Agency.
BZ
The
project
had
several
meetings
in
the
community:
one
held
body
of
BPD,
a
of
Watson
planning,
Development
Agency
or
October
27th
at
the
rocks
boy,
Boys
&,
Girls
Club,
to
discuss
the
project's
PMF
and
development
plan.
On
November
1st,
there
was
a
meeting
held
by
BPD
a
Feld
with
the
impact
advisory
group
meeting,
which
was
held
at
the
Roxbury
Boys
&
Girls
Club,
and
there
was
recently
a
meeting.
I,
don't
know
the
exact
date.
Mr.
BZ
talk
about
that,
that
was
within
the
last
couple
of
weeks,
the
neighborhood,
because
there
was
some
questions
and
concerns
that
the
neighborhood
hasn't
missed
a
career.
It
can
give
you
more
detail
on
that.
Mr.
Ford,
the
secretary
already
spoke
to
leave
areas
that
are
being
sought.
So
I
will
leave
it
there.
If
you
like
mr.
Washington,
to
walk
using
the
project
we
more
than
happy
to
do
so.
Tell.
B
CA
BB
CA
AT
CB
BZ
CB
B
AW
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board
John
Ellison
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services
on
behalf
of
Josh
McFadden.
We
would
like
to
go
on
record
in
support.
There
have
been
many
community
meetings
on
this
project
and
the
community
as
a
whole
is
in
support.
You
understand
there
is
an
a
butter
concerned
about
a
few
issues,
including
rodents,
parking
and
shadows,
so
we
would
ask
if
approved,
that
the
developer
continues
to
work
with
them.
Thank
you.
AM
CC
BQ
BQ
T
Playing
spy
I
live
on
Clifford
Street,
we've
been
there
for
quite
a
few
years.
Our
kids
grew
up
on
cliff
and
I
like
to
say
that
we're
very
fortunate
to
have
this
quality
of
building
opposed
for
our
neighborhood,
because
we've
been
driving
by
these
Lots
for
years
that
have
been
neglected
presently
with
trash
dumped
all
over
the
place
and
it's
something
that,
as
a
driver
on
Clifford
street
I,
go
by
every
day.
Mr.
president,
you
know
we
pay
taxes,
we
expect
the
same
as
others
in
the
neighborhood.
K
T
That
we
can
get
rid
of
all
the
blight
I
I,
see
it
every
day
and
in
the
proposals
first
class
has
been
first
class.
They
have
been
very
flexible
and
the
fact
that
the
economy
owner-occupied
to
me
is
the
bonus
where,
if
anybody
in
the
neighborhood
has
any
concerns
the
front
doors
there
at
these
forty
hours
a
week
so
I
and
my
wife
and
family
and
everybody
I
spoke
to
on
the
street,
would
like
to
say
we
back
and
hope
that
you
affirm.
CD
I'm
an
attorney
but
I
do
to
advocate
for
other
people,
not
for
myself,
and
it's
extremely
upsetting
for
me
to
get
to
be
64
years
old
and
find
that
I
am
normally
stressed
and
awake
at
night,
because
I
live
there
and
I've
looked
out
at
one
level
for
28
years
and
now,
instead
of
saying
we're
going
to
build
one
level
of
those
two
levels,
no
we're
going
to
build
four
or
five,
and
that's
overwhelming
for
the
distance
between
my
house
and
the
property
line.
Right
now
and
I
understand
they're
going
to
tear
it
down.
CD
I
understand
they're,
going
to
move
it
10
to
15
10
to
12
feet
further,
but
the
shadows
that
will
be
cast
by
that
are
just
unbelievable.
I
do
not
think
they
have
looked
at
in
at
all
levels:
I
live
there.
I
actually
was
in
the
past
two
years
and
started
fixing
up
my
house,
and
one
of
the
things
I
did
is
I
put
a
window
on
that
side
bit
by
that
wall
and
extra
windows.
It
gets
the
sunlight
and
raised
the
window
to
get
the
sunlight.
CD
One
of
the
other
problems,
I've
noticed
when
it's
the
one
floor
is
that
of
the
building
that
I've
looked
out
over
for
28
years.
Is
that
when
it's
high
snow,
all
of
that
comes
down
and
falls
right
to
my
house,
which
the
back
of
it
goes
down
so
I'm
concerned
about
water
and
overflow.
I
am
absolutely
concerned
of
the
fact
that
51,
underground
2
level
parking
are
going
to
be
right
there
with
the
entrance
coming
in
or
the
exit
coming
out.
CD
I'm
not
sure
which
they've
changed
it
right
next
to
my
house,
so,
first
of
all
buildings
taking
down
the
wall
and
building
office
construction,
which
the
first
phase
is
two
years,
the
second
phase
another
two
years,
the
north
is
going
to
be
unbelievable.
The
parking
ventilation
I
already
have
allergies.
One
of
the
things
I
want
to
do
to
continue
to
be
in
the
work
force
is
to
bring
my
89
year
old
mother
to
stay
with
me
and
she
has
allergy.
So
we're
going
to
be
right
next
to
the
parking
garage
with
the
noise
and
allergy.
CD
So
my
comfort
and
peace
and
enjoyment
of
my
property
is
being
taken
away
and
for
as
I
seen
here,
it's
from
is
to
have
the
place,
cleaned
up
and
made
pretty
and
I'm
saying
I
think
that
can
be
done
less
than
putting
95
units
next
to
me
with
51
levels
of
underground
parking,
which
actually
will
be
turned
out
to
be
74.
When
you
add
in
the
Waverly
Street
with
all
due
respect.
This
is
not
identically
of
read
by
the
abutters
on
Clifford
Street,
with
all
due
respect.
Mr.
Sparrow
lives
pathways
to
the
street.
CD
I
live
right
there,
my
next
door,
neighbor
was
18.
I
thought
she
would
be
this
morning,
she's
against
it.
That
person
at
19
says
that's
too
many
units.
The
person
at
21
is
against
it.
The
person
that
27
is
against
it,
so
I,
don't
know
where
all
of
this
no
one
is
against.
It
is
not
true.
I
also
just
want
to
mention
having
lived
in
Boston
all
the
time.
The
proposal
they
have,
especially
with
me
being
a
butter
I,
think
someone
should
have
said
something
directly
to
my
house.
CD
I'll
come
by
my
house
or
come
by
the
neighborhood
houses
to
talk
to
people
is
very
convenient
to
say
the
whole
neighborhood
meetings,
but
when
the
people
most
affected
don't
show
up
and
I
think
you
have
an
extra
duty
to
the
light
and
make
sure-
and
that
has
not
been
done
and
like,
for
instance,
hearing
notice
of
hearing
this
case.
I
didn't
get
these
I
was
here
the
last
time
and
I
knew
it
was
rescheduled.
I
didn't
get
a
reschedule
notice.
CD
My
neighbors
did
get
me
scheduled
numbers,
so
the
notices
for
the
hearings
will
go
out
all
time.
People
don't
show
up
and
the
people
that
have
stood
here
and
said
this
is
yours,
Alan
the
whole
neighborhood
is,
and
approval
of
it
is
not
true.
I
was
just
had
a
neighborhood
meeting
last
night.
That
was
not
true.
Okay,.
B
Thank
you.
Thank
you
just
to
quickly
respond
to
you
is
that
our
practice
is
that,
since
things
that
we
did
not
send
out
notices
on
rehearing,
because
there
are
a
couple
of
ways
that
people
know
that
it's
been
rescheduled,
one
is
from
people
who
have
been
here
who
know
and
second
since
the
meeting
is
being
live-streamed
and
is
also
repeated
constantly
on
TV
I.
Think
that's
another
way
of
of
knowing
what
happened
if
you're
interested.
So
there's
there's
a
couple
of
ways.
B
BZ
N
B
So
the
questions,
can
you
please
respond
to
the
question
by
via
butter
about
the
distance
of
the
building
from
hub
property
and
I
get
the
sense
of
being
overwhelmed?
Having
this
well
shoe
shaped
structure
around,
they
are
very
attractive.
Building,
like
you
can
understand
the
concerns
of
a
butter
yeah.
BM
BZ
As
well
and
for
a
long
time
and
I
think
I'm
sympathetic
to
the
fact
that
she
went
a
representation
of
the
other
neighbors
is
such
that
they
were
in
opposition,
that
we
have
no
way
of
knowing
that
for
sure,
because
we
ever
not
received
anything
from
them
and
I
understand.
The
current
renewed
returns
are
close.
Proximity
I
have
lived
in
that
neighborhood
up
until
98,
not
directly
related
next
to
this
development,
but
I'm
knocking
down
warranty
and
clicking
speed
in
those
states,
often
and
as
mr.
BZ
spiro
said,
I've
looked
at
this
property
over
the
years
since
coming
here
to
Boston
at
67,
I
seen
this
property
being
that
I
condition.
Ever
since
the
movie
theater
I
guess
there
was
even
three
days
I
think
to
her
concerns.
Yes,
oh
yes,
then
we'll
be
the
shadows
that
will
you
know,
there's
no
way
of
denying
it.
Mr.
Washington
will
address
the
distance
issue
from
her
respective
property
water
it
overflow.
Certainly
we
will
be
taking
a
mitigation
to
ensure
that
and
that
anything
from
that
building
will
not
adversely
affect
her
particular
property.
I,
don't
know.
BZ
Maybe
we
can
address
the
ventilation
issue
for
the
garage,
maybe
mr.
declare
that
particular
issue
just
to
mitigate
some
of
our
concerns
without
the
fields
I
recognize
that
that
will
be
there,
and
obviously
there
is
the
mitigation
plan
which
the
which
be
TVA
requires
both
in
terms
of
rodents
and
noise
and
things
of
nature.
Certainly,
there
will
be
some
during
the
construction
and
a
certain
that
my
client
will
do
as
much
as
they
can
to
notify
people
and
to
mitigate
it.
Obviously,
the
construction
won't
be
taking
place
after
certain
house.
BZ
I
think
the
city
requirement
is
3
p.m.
is
the
latest,
but
certainly
wouldn't
he
take
the
place
in
the
evening.
So
I
think
the
history
that
the
cuckoo's
construction
had
had
in
this
community
and
the
types
of
development.
The
concern,
as
we
mentioned
by
mr.
Sparrow
and
others-
the
hiring
of
individual
for
the
community
to
do
the
job,
both
well
for
the
type
of
relationship
that
crews,
Development
Corporation,
has
and
we'll
definitely
be
taking
into
account.
The
conservative
mr.
BZ
Ellison
will
be
addressing
her
throughout
this
particular
process,
as
well
as
miss
wheeler
and
the
end
of
the
residence
of
Clifford
and
way
too
extreme,
so
with
that
I
would
just
add
into
Washington
and
judge
the
distance
piece
and
the
mr..
Whoever
could
possibly
speak
to
you
about,
what's
being
done
with
respect
to
the
garage
and
ventilation.
Thank.
CB
You
the
we
agree
with
those
comments
and
we've
taken
a
great
deal
of
effort
to
make
sure
that
we
are
impacting
the
neighbors
as
little
as
possible
cruise
company
working
DMV
working
with
the
BRE
and
the
Civic
design
Commission,
and
that's
been
one
of
our
concerns
all
along.
This
particular
house
is
sort
of
three
to
four
feet
off
of
the
profit
line
and
we
are.
The
building
is
another
ten
feet
away.
B
CB
CB
We
originally
started
out
with
one
level
of
parking
and
the
additional
parking
and
the
project
was
a
risotto
really
were
neighbors
expression
of
a
desire
or
additional
park,
and
so
we
have
to
level
the
lower
level
is
completely
underground
and
the
portion
of
appears
in
fact
there,
but
its
own
I
want
to
dress
ma'am.
Okay.
One
other
thing
I
wanted
to
say
was
that
the
son
studies
we
did
no
web
Studies
on
the
findings
required,
whether
you
re
and
the
the
building.
CB
Although
we
are
moving
from
a
one-story
building
over
40
beehive
inside
the
villas,
48
will
be
49
far
away.
The
Sun
studies
indicate
that
that
particular
house
or
the
house
of
bolsters
on
that
patio
or
attained
from
north
to
south,
so
the
Sun
as
east
away
is
almost
knows.
There's
no
shadow
on
those
problems
from
PETA
and.
P
B
E
BZ
BR
BR
C
CE
CE
CE
CE
E
E
CE
CE
BB
BB
CE
AG
CE
G
B
C
Chair
this
is
the
subcommittee
where,
unfortunately,
couldn't
do
it
last
month's
meeting,
so
we're
going
to
take
care
of
it.
Today
colleague
went
into
the
racket
calling
VOA
seven
zero:
four
five:
zero
767
Rutherford
Avenue.
This
is
the
second
and
third
floor.
Bedroom
Edition
was
approved
with
VRA
V
PDA
next
case
was
VOA,
seven
zero,
seven,
eight,
eight
six
one
H
Street
button.
C
H
H
Street
place.
It
was
approved
with
the
extend
living
space
into
a
single-family
residential
case
VOA,
six,
seven,
six,
zero
five,
six
eleven
Sagamore
Street
was
to
extend
living
space
to
existing
single-family
residential.
It
was
approved
with
BBD
a
case
POA
7:01
to
7421
fort
North,
Clark
Street.
This
was
annexed
as
an
extension.
A
proposed
dollar
addition
and
replace
previous
deck.
It
was
approved
at
BPD
a
case
boa
seven,
one:
two:
five
zero
six,
sixty
eight
Clifton
Dale
Street
was
extend.
C
Living
space
into
the
basement
was
approved
case,
boa
six,
nine,
three,
seven,
five,
three,
seventy
one:
seventy
three
Green
Street,
it
was
to
add
tandem
parking
spaces,
was
approved,
boa
six,
nine,
four,
eight
six,
five,
forty
three,
forty
forty
three
thirty
seven
to
forty
three
forty
one
Washington
Street.
It
was
to
change
lives
from
a
traveling
to
beauty
shop.
It
was
approved,
but
the
Pope
provide
plants
plans
were
stamped
by
the
architect,
his
boa
seven,
zero.
C
Five,
three
six,
nine
forty
three
mints
on
road
renovation
edition
to
include
a
renovated
half
bath
was
approved
with
BPD
a
case
POA
six,
eight
to
nine
one.
Four
three
eleven
to
three
fifteen
Belgrade
Avenue:
this
was
a
doggy
daycare
that
was
approved
with
BPD
a
case,
boa
seven,
one
one:
three,
one:
zero
twenty
seven
Castro
Street
this
was
to
remove
the
existing
second
floor
and
build
a
new
second
floor.
At
full
height.
It
was
approved
with
ppb
a
and
boa
six
six
one
one,
two
one
one.
C
Forty
five
Cory
Street
was
denied
without
prejudice
for
a
no-show
next
case,
BOA,
six,
eight
three,
two,
nine
five,
seventeen
Brookville
Street,
was
to
finish
a
remodel.
Existing
basement
space
was
approved
with
proviso
and
in
the
case
the
last
case,
BOA
six,
six,
five,
seven,
five,
nine
one.
Forty
five
for
145,
a
East
Berkeley
Street,
was
in
addition
to
the
first
floor
and
back
of
the
restaurant,
which
was
approved
I'm,
going
to
find
out
what
that
proviso
was
on
Brookville.