►
From YouTube: Zoning Board of Appeal Hearing 02-27-18
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
Finding
the
board
of
appeal
for
tuesday
february
27th
is
now
in
session.
Just
a
reminder.
Please
make
sure
all
your
cell
phones
are
out
and
if
you
have
conversations
that
you
need
to
have,
please
take
them
outside
of
the
room,
in
conformance
with
the
Open
Meeting
Law
I'm,
reminding
you
that
this
meeting
is
being
live-streamed.
A
If
you
are
here
to
speak
in
support
or
in
opposition
to
the
project,
this
is
just
a
reminder
that
we
take
everybody's
comments
under
advisement
we
take
of
the
RAS,
the
community
groups,
the
mayor's
office.
We
take
everybody's
information
and
knowledge
under
advisement.
So
if
you
are
here
to
speak-
and
you
know
give
us
new
information,
please
if
somebody
has
already
stated
your
concern
or
your
issue
or
yes,
the
the
reason
why
you
are
in
support,
please
just
put
your
name
and
address
on
the
record
that
will
help
us
keep
keep
things
flowing.
A
B
C
D
D
It
was
an
application
for
a
new
building
at
residential
building
at
13
shetland
Street
in
Ward
8,
a
four-story
57
unit,
building
that,
as
I
say,
was
approved
by
the
board.
The
reason
why
I'm
here
today
is
to
seek
clarification
on
one
of
the
two
provisos
ostensibly
attached
to
the
board's
decision
of
the
hearing.
First
proviso
is
of
BBD
a
design
review,
which
is,
of
course,
we
understand.
The
second
proviso.
D
There
are
a
couple
of
issues
that
I
have
wood
for
buy.
So,
first
and
foremost,
though
it's
when
I
went
back
and
watched
the
tape
a
couple
of
times
there
was
no
real,
clear
indication
of
what
the
language
should
be.
For
that
proviso,
that's
number
one.
The
other
concerns
I
have
about
2
proviso
are
this?
Is
a
residential
zone?
D
I
understand
cases
where
we
have
residential
encroachment
into
business
districts
and
the
board
has
attached,
provides
those
to
its
decisions,
usually
requiring
that
language
be
put
either
in
lease
agreements
or
master
deeds,
putting
residents
of
the
future
building
on
Aware's
that
they
are
residents
in
a
business
district
and
that
there
are
business
activities.
That's
not
the
case
here.
This
is
a
residential
zone
district.
It's
a
3f
district.
A
A
D
Is
the
language
that
was
used
so
I
also
have
concerns
about
a
deed
restriction,
because
a
deed
restriction
needs
to
be
enforceable,
needs
to
be
enforceable
by
some
party
in
order
to
be
effective,
I,
don't
know
how
deed
restriction
here
would
be
enforced
and
by
whom
it
would
be
enforced.
I
also
have
very
serious
concerns
about
any
deed
restriction
that
would
purport
to
restrain
the
ability
of
a
citizen
to
essentially
petition
government
about
activities
that
are
that
our
noxious
in
his
or
her
neighborhood.
D
So
my
point
is
how
can
somebody
be
restrained,
for
example,
from
calling
ISD
or
code
enforcement
about
an
idling
truck
that
is
idling
a
commercial
vehicle
that
is
idling
in
violation
of
the
state's
anti-idling
law?
You
cannot
restrain
somebody
by
means
of
a
private
deed
restriction
from
petitioning
governmental
officials,
for
alleged
violation
of
wooden,
ances
or
state
or
federal
regulations
or
laws
and.
A
Mr.
Moran
see
how
about
this
may
I
have
a
motion
please
to
have
the
VRA,
who
is
the
planning
agency
for
the
city
of
Boston?
Do
some
research
and
come
up
with
with
language
that
will
address
the
concerns
that
really,
that
really
are
at
the
core
of
this,
as
the
is
the
residential
use,
that
abuts
apparent
very
heavily
used
industrial
area
so
that
all
parties
feel
that
they
have
a
right
to
to
live
their
lives
in
a
normal
fashion.
Okay,
so
may
I
have
a
motion
to
that
effect.
E
A
A
B
On
your
next
case
for
G
card
calling
boa
seven,
nine,
two
seven
one,
seven
two
sixty-two
Commonwealth
Avenue
the
project
proposes
a
combination
of
two
multifamily
apartment
buildings,
216
262,
Comm
Ave,
into
one
for
a
total
of
five
dwelling
units
to
be
known
as
262
Commonwealth
Avenue.
The
violation
is
article
32,
section,
4a,
G
card
applicability,
a
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
my.
F
Name
is
Adam
Gilmore
from
Meyer
Meyer,
architects
representing
the
project
at
26262,
Commonwealth,
Avenue,
residential
building
proposal.
We
were
received
a
zoning
denial
for
jihad
in
the
ground,
water
overlay
and
submitted
drawings
with
to
Boston,
Water
and
Sewer,
which
have
subsequently
been
approved.
You
have
on
file.
A
G
B
H
The
attorney
at
McDermott,
quilty
and
Miller,
representing
the
property
owner
who's
with
me
as
well,
the
referral
is
made,
are
very
late
in
this.
In
the
process
of
butters
meeting
only
two
or
three
days
ago,
some
concerns
were
raised.
I
don't
think
we
have
an
opportunity
to
address
in
order
to
be
supported.
H
A
A
B
B
B
The
next
case
calling
boa
7
7
2
6
4
846
Hichborn
street.
This
is
seeking
that
combined
three
existing
Lots
and
into
one
parcel
of
15,000
253
square
feet.
Demolish
tree
existence,
trucks
and
erect
a
five-story
residential
building
with
46
units
and
50
parking
spaces.
The
violation
is
article
51,
section
19,
a
multi-family
dwelling
is
forbidden,
Article
51,
section
19
accessory
parking
is
forbidden,
Article,
51,
section
20
the
floor.
The
a
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
51,
section
20,
the
building
height
is
successive
article
51
section
20.
The
rear
yard
is
insufficient.
B
I
Morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
Daniel
Tosh
Gatto
from
Draco
and
Toscano
LLP
attorney
in
law.
We're
located
at
15,
Broad
Street
in
Boston,
Oh
to
109
I
represent
Hichborn
partners
to
my
immediate
right,
representing
RCA
is
James
Christopher
to
my
far
right
is
representing
Hichborn.
Cotton
is
one
of
the
principals
Joe
to
Gangi.
We're
seeking
your
support
today
to
combine
three
three
lots:
a
rectified
story,
building
46
condominium
units
with
59
parking
spots
that
combine
three
Lots
equals
59.
A
A
I
Three
Lots,
combined
together
equal
approximately
a
little
bit
over
fifteen
thousand
two
hundred
square
feet
of
lot
space.
Here's
the
46
units,
the
breakdown
of
the
units,
the
six
studio
apartments,
six
studio,
condos,
which
the
range
from
507
square
feet
to
538
square
feet.
There's
eight
one:
bedroom,
condos
at
666
square
feet,
825
square
feet,
700,
seven
one-bedroom
plus,
which
has
a
study
which
a
746
square
feet
863
square
feet.
I
There
are
24
two
bedroom
units
at
873
square,
feets,
a
1187
square
feet
in
this
one,
three-bedroom
condo
at
1387
square
feet
we're
going
to
go
through
some
of
the
violations
and
if
everyone
has
particulars
on
the
floor
plan
of
design
defer
to
mr.
Christopher.
So
this
is
in
a
local
industrial
area
which
is
a
multi-family
is
the
forbidding.
So
we
seek
and
relief
for
that
section
to
put
a
multi-family
residential
building
that
we
feel
this
appropriate,
be
given
the
new
character
of
this
particular
area.
I
There's
a
few
developments
going
on
over
in
that
area,
which
have
a
numerous
multi-family
residential
units
of
is
the
New
Balance
project
that
just
went
up
directly
behind
us,
the
FAO
in
this
area.
The
requirement
is
a2
we're
at
3.26
looking.
We
feel
that
that's
appropriate
and
seeking
relief.
Looking
at
the
guest
read
study
that
was
done
a
couple
of
years
ago.
The
the
range
for
that
area
was
approximately
three
point.
Two
five
we
have
at
three
point
two
six
with
our
ffar,
the
building
height
is
out
in
that
area
is
forty
five.
I
The
five
stories
goes
up
to
fifty
seven
feet,
but
we
do
add
open
space
on
the
roof.
We
have
a
thirteen
private
roof
decks.
We
have
a
community
room.
We
have
a
yoga
room
on
the
roof
that
brings
the
height
up
to
sixty
seven
feet
in
height.
Adding
those
amenities
for
the
condo
association
wanted
to
create
more
I
mean
because
it's
a
condo
homeownership.
We
wanted
to
create
a
few
amenities
to
make
sure
that
people
are
comfortable
there
and
want
to
stay
there.
So
there's
a
community
Rufe
yoga
room
story
on
the
roof,
etc.
I
The
Riyadh
in
the
area
is
12.
We
are
at
floor
throughout
the
rear
yard,
so
that's
a
violation
where
I'm
asking
for
some
relief
on
that
regard.
The
off
street
parking
in
the
loading
zone
parking.
So
in
the
area
that
requires
two
spots
for
every
unit,
we're
offering
the
one
once
more
little
bit
more
than
one
spot
for
a
unit
of
59
parking
spots,
the
parking
is
going
to
be
in
the
basement
and
also
in
the
firt
first
of
all
levels
of
the
parking.
I
So
it's
in
ground
parking
and
the
loading
zone
we're
required
to
have
one
loading
zone
week.
We
do
not
have
a
loading
dock.
Well,
however,
we
are
designating
one
parking
spot
for
any
inside
the
building
for
any
drop-off
pickup
deliveries
that
is
close
to
the
elevator
Russia
that
is
close
to
the
elevator
within
within
the
building.
But
we
don't
have
the
loading
dock,
but
we
do
have
designate
one
spot
for
for
folks
to
for
deliveries
and
pickups,
etc.
I
will
open
it
up
for
any
questions
and
then
we'll
those
are
the
violations.
A
J
I
A
J
K
L
M
N
Chair
members
of
the
board
Annabelle
gone
from
the
Brighton
Austin
Improvement
Association.
We
have
voted
several
times
against
this
project.
For
many
reasons,
one
the
units
are
small,
we've
asked
for
them
to
do.
The
only
caveat
that
they
had
in
this
project
was
that
it
was
for
home
ownership,
but
they
refuse
to
even
put
50%
home
ownership
and
their
condo
documents.
So
there's
no
guarantee
that
it
is
for
home
ownership.
They
won't
even
commit
to
that.
N
There's
no
setbacks.
There's
no
green
space!
We've
asked
for
green
space.
Our
answer
was
that
there's
green
space
that
new
balance,
that's
really
an
unacceptable
answer.
We
are
concerned
about
the
street
part
of
the
street
right
where
the
garage
comes
out
at
that
building
turns
into
a
one-way
they're
forced
onto
a
small
street
that
only
room
for
one
car
and
it's
a
two-way
there's
delivery
trucks
there
for
a
commercial
that
blocks
the
street
all
the
time.
Those
things
have
not
been
addressed.
This
project
is
shy
of
300
feet
from
a
large
project
review.
A
K
N
I
Regards
to
the
parking
we
did
redesign
the
garage,
the
sidewalk
rather
than
brick.
We
we
redesigned
it
to
put
glass
so
there's
an
opening,
both
classic
and
any
vehicles
coming
in
around
will
be
able
to
see
on
the
street.
We
did
add,
but
designating
a
certain
amount
of
funds
for
landscaping
in
that
area.
For
the
streetscape
for
this
particular
project,
we
feel
that
the
the
unit
size
are
adequate.
We,
this
was
condos
right
from
the
inception.
I
think.
A
We're
hearing
is
that
the
community
feels
that
they're
and
they
they
have
a
larger
sense
of
what's
going
on
community-wide
what
would
be
a
better
fit
for
them
and
it
sounds
like
it
hasn't
the
the
conversation
kind
of
stalled
somewhere
this.
Is
it
worth
a
deferral
for
you
guys
or
should
we
deny
it
and
have
you
start
from
scratch.
I
A
A
However,
since
you
are
really
the
first
big
residential
project
in
there,
I
think
it
needs
perhaps
some
more
time
to
be
thought
through
in
some
way,
and
we
would
expect
the
area
might
be
able
to
facilitate
that,
so
that,
since
this
is
a
new
use
in
in
an
area
that
you
know,
has
no
no
history
of
presidential
years
that
it
might
might
benefit
from
a
second
look.
You
may
have
a
motion.
Please.
O
I
A
B
Boa
777
271
606,
Cambridge
Street.
This
is
the
new
driveway
for
two
vehicles:
the
violations,
article
10
section
1,
the
minimum
of
5
foot
from
the
lot
line;
article
51,
section,
9,
open
spaces,
insufficient
article
51,
section,
56
off
street
parking
and
loading
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
K
P
A
P
R
S
Manekineko
BTV
the
plans
do
work.
The
zoning
I
would
leave
up
to
the
boy,
but
from
the
traffic
perspective
the
curb
cut
does
work
off
of
Cambridge
Street
and
accommodates
two
spaces
Aten
that
by
21
in
front
of
the
other,
but
it
doesn't
work
now.
As
far
as
the
other
curb
cut,
that's
something
that
I'll
leave
up
to
you,
but
it
does
work
from
a
BTD
perspective
and.
A
R
Q
A
A
A
P
House
to
our
left
at
6:04,
a
two-family
house
is
now
a
four
family
house.
It
has
at
least
a
thousand
individuals
in
there
all
the
time
they
don't
understand
the
nature
of
the
shared
driveway.
They
move
in
there
with
their
cars
there
and
we
can
get
out.
We
are
not
having
fights,
we
call
the
police.
The
police
can
says
this
is
your
problem.
It's
in
your
property.
We
have
signs
there,
both
of
us
that
they
say
the
car
will
be
towed,
but
it
doesn't
work.
P
L
A
L
A
N
K
T
Of
the
board
Tony
does
a
dural
representing
the
Austin
Civic
Association
want
to
concur
with
the
people
before
me.
This
is
really
a.
We
felt
as
a
community
a
reasonable
and
appropriate
response
to
remediate
the
situation.
There
was
a
change
of
ownership
to
the
left
of
them
and
obviously
they
have
no
regards
for
the
people
to
the
right
of
them
and,
as
the
proponents
was
saying,
they've
had
numerous
occasions
where
the
driveway
has
been
blocked
and
their
people
cannot
enter
or
exit
the
the
lot.
T
Q
K
P
P
You
can't
get
in
one
big
one
when
it's
pretty
issue
is
that
the
owner
is
trying
its
best.
It's
like.
We
have
a
dozen
individuals
that
they
have
French
boyfriend,
girlfriend
they
come
in
or
they
visiting,
they
leave
their
cars
thinking.
Oh
this
is
my
friend's
house
or
my
fiance
or
whatever,
and
they
leave
they.
Don't
they
don't
think
this
is
not.
We
can
be
walking
this
it
there
is
there.
E
U
A
W
A
Q
R
P
A
B
A
B
Next
case,
calling
boa
seven,
seven,
seven,
four,
four
nine
six,
oh
six,
two
six
ten
sent
us
tree.
This
is
amended
occupancy
of
one
retail
one
nail
salon.
Laundry
and
doggy
daycare
was
accessory,
retail
to
the
doggie
daycare,
nail
salon,
laundry
and
doggy
daycare
with
accessory
retail
services.
The
new
doggie
daycare
space
requires
no
work
and
will
function
solely
as
a
point
place
for
dogs,
while
dog,
washing
and
retail
service
will
remain
in
the
existing
doggie
daycare.
B
X
Miss
Baxter
unfortunately,
has
the
flu
and
couldn't
be
here
today,
she's
the
owner
and
operator
of
fancy-shmancy-
and
we
came
before
this
for
three
years
ago
to
seek
relief
to
allow
her
to
open
her
business,
fancy
schmancy
a
doggie
being
here
by
default,
forbidden
use
in
this
area,
because
the
code
doesn't
list
doggy
daycare
in
the
use
table,
so
it
defaults
has
forbidden,
and
this
Ward
extended
that
relief
three
years
ago.
We're
asking
today.
If
you
look
at
she's,
basically
expanding
her
operation.
X
Her
business
is
growing,
she's
done
very
well
and
she
seems
of
meeting
his
serious
need
in
the
community.
But
if
you
see
the
building
that
sick,
so
it's
actually
goes
610
to
606
Center
on
the
front
page.
What
the
the
unit,
all
the
the
storefront,
all
the
way
to
the
left,
has
become
vacant,
and
so
what
she's
seeking
to
do
is
to
legalize
that
as
doggy
daycare
and
that's.
X
They
belong
to
solely
as
play
space
for
the
dogs,
whereas
when
we
came
before
the
board
four
years
ago,
the
first
base
concluded
bathing
and
grooming
stations
and
so
she's
just
looking
to
experience,
you
can
accommodate
more
dogs.
She
has
currently
hired
six
local
employees.
They're,
not
1099.
Workers
are
actually
employees.
She
can
get
up
to
ten.
With
this
expansion
she
can
add
up
to
twenty
five
dogs
as
well.
So.
A
E
X
Was
a
retail
establishment,
a
general
store
and
actually
I
shouldn't
mention
just
my
point
of
order
in
the
ISD
refusal
I
just
like
to
indicate
Dean
correctly
cited
a
high-carb
provision
of
the
code.
I
don't
disagree
that
it's
considered
a
forbidden
use,
but
it
should
indicate
the
violation
under
Section
55,
one
sex
forbidden.
Y
A
Z
AA
AD
B
B
Following
a
next
case,
calling
boa
7,
8
6
8,
7,
253
Orchard
field
road-
this
is
to
enclose
an
existing
report
to
the
second
floor
for
a
room
incorporate
the
attic
area,
the
violation,
article
50,
section,
29,
the
fluid
a
ratio
is
excessive,
an
article
65,
section,
9,
the
side
yard
setback
is
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
AE
My
client
is
an
owner
occupant
of
a
two-family
home,
particularly
small
houses
in
this
area.
She
has
on
the
first
floor,
apartment
that's
about
six
hundred
square
feet.
She
has
the
second
and
third
which
she
uses
for
her
family.
The
second
floor
is
also
about
six
or
seven
hundred,
and
she
has
an
attic
which
has
one
additional
bedroom.
AE
Her
whole
apartment
is
about
a
thousand
square
feet
over
London
and
her
family
is
growling.
She
has
two
bedrooms
now.
What
she
wants
to
do
is
to
close
the
back
porch
she's,
not
changing
the
footprint
of
the
building
and
then
within
the
Attic.
The
attic
is
only
the
front
half
of
the
building.
She
wants
to
extend
the
Attic
the
full
length
of
the
building.
What
would
that
leave?
Her
is
approximately
fourteen
or
fifteen
hundred
square
feet
with
the
first-floor
apartment.
The
total
square
footage
would
be
about
2,300.
AE
Q
AF
A
B
This
is
no
add
a
new
roof
deck
and
spiral.
Stair
the
violations,
article
65
section,
nine,
the
height-
is
excessive
article
65
section
nine.
The
rail
yard
setback
is
insufficient.
Article
66
section
nine,
the
height
of
success
of
article
80,
section
82,
small
project
review
and
article
65,
section
nine
side
yard
setback
requirements.
Is
it
sufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record
place?
Matthew,
Saint,
Peter,
21,.
Q
AI
AJ
B
This
is
erect
a
new
three
unit,
townhouse
building
and
parking
beneath
the
violations.
Article
50
section
29
additional
law.
There
is
insufficient
article
30
section
29,
the
floating
a
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
50,
section,
29,
building
height
is
excessive
article
50,
section
29,
the
usable
open
space
is
insufficient.
Article
50
section
29,
a
in
the
front
yard,
is
insufficient.
Article
50
section
20
now
in
the
side
yard,
is
insufficient.
An
article
50
section
29
the
rear
yard.
Is
it
sufficient
name
an
address
for
the
record?
Please?
Yes,.
AK
K
AK
AL
AK
AK
A
A
AK
District
is
we
have
a
lot
that
we
are
proposing
on
is
only
twenty
six
hundred
square
feet
in
a
in
a
three
four
thousand
district:
here's
a
rendering
of
the
proposed
project
next
to
the
field,
and
the
concept
is
if
the
town
house
has
a
direct
link,
its
own
entry
doors
on
grade
level.
So,
although
it's
three
units
they
each
have
their
own
entry,
they
have
parking
below
the
building
and
the
idea
is
that
they're,
not
no
one
is
living
a
popular.
AK
It's
not
flats
like
the
triple
decker
without
so
it's
a
little
different
in
that
sense,
and
we
have
the
live
depth
to
be
able
to
do
that.
Our
violations
are
primarily
side,
the
are
related
and
we
favored
the
building
to
the
playing
field
edge
partially,
because
we
know
that
there
will
look
there
conceivably
and
ever
in
the
future.
Tell.
A
AK
AK
A
I
AK
The
max
that
are
asking
for
42
and
assembly
because
we
are
hiding
our
parking
below
the
building.
We
think
that
we're
hiding
in
a
way
that
the
neighborhood
you
will
hear
momentarily
that
we
from
the
root
process
we've
had
an
excellent
support
for
this
in
partially
partially
to
prefer
hiding
our
parking,
which
drives
the
building
high
up.
I
think
that
from
an
urban
design
standpoint,
that's
a
very
positive
thing
and
it
was
well-received
besides.
AK
AK
AK
AK
A
Q
AK
A
Q
B
Calling
the
next
case
calling
boa
seven
nine
six,
seven,
six
four
137
a
Murray
Street.
This
is
construction
of
new
residential
building
on
apostle
to
be
subdivided,
the
new
structure
shall
be
detached.
Four
storeys
in
height
from
street
grade
bottle,
store
b18
construction.
Four
stories
the
building
will
have
62
units.
The
violation
is
article
29,
section
4.
This
is
the
G
pod
applicability,
Greenbelt
protection,
overlay
district,
nautical
55,
section
9,
the
lobby
or
additional
dwelling
unit,
is
insufficient.
Article
55
section
on
the
phylidia
ratio
is
excessive.
B
B
AO
Morning,
madam
chair
and
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
Emily
Loomis,
with
urban
edge
housing
corporation
located
at
1542,
Columbus
Ave
in
Roxbury
I'm
joined
today
by
Kendra
Halle,
well
with
icon
architecture
and
Joe
Lieber
attorney
with
Klein
Warnock.
Thank
you
for
your
consideration
of
our
application.
Our
request
is
for
certain
zoning
relief
on
the
new
construction
of
62
apartments,
all
of
which
will
be
affordable
to
be
located
at
137
a
Murray
Street.
The
proposed
building
will
be
located
on
what
is
currently
a
six
acre
site
owned
by
the
Boston
Housing
Authority.
AO
That
site
currently
has
a
building
with
199
apartments
for
a
very
low-income
senior
and
disabled
residents.
In
2015,
the
Boston
Housing
Authority
selected
urban
edge,
the
community
builders
and
Jamaica
Plain
Neighborhood
Development
Corporation
to
redevelop
the
entire
site.
The
proposal
calls
for
the
subdivision
of
the
six
acre
site
to
allow
three
new
buildings
to
be
constructed,
one
of
which
is
137
Amery
the
subject
of
this
application.
The
goal
is
for
those
new
buildings
to
provide
economic
benefits
that
support
the
goal
of
renovating
the
existing
199,
affordable
senior
apartments.
AO
A
AB
AB
AB
Work
with
that
in
designing
the
building
we
come
here
and
speed
elevation
that
shares
the
context.
Have
we
put
some
thought
into
the
scale
of
our
building?
137
angry
sits
between
the
large
70
foot
scale
of
the
125
am
senior
building
and
the
Victorian
columns
just
on
their
chest
that
on
Newbury
Street,
this
building
is
four
stories
tall,
but
at
the
back
it
is
down
here
it's
five
stories.
So
we've
worked
to
make
this
small
weather-related.
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
A
Z
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board
Alexandra
Valdez
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services,
we
would
like
to
go
on
record
to
support.
We
had
a
lot
of
community
meetings
as
well
as
a
butters
meeting
is
that
everyone
is
in
full
support.
I
would
also
like
to
state
that
this
Jamaica
Plain
neighborhood
council,
as
well
as
the
Jamaica
Plain
neighborhood
zoning
board,
also
approved
this
project.
Thank.
AP
AQ
AA
AS
Morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board
Liana
Poston
from
state
representative
Liz
Miley's
office,
the
representative
is
really
thrilled
to
see
some
additional
affordable
units
in
the
neighborhoods.
A
common
thread
of
conversation
in
the
neighborhood
and
the
developers
have
been
really
responsive
to
residents,
concern
history,
ing
meetings.
AS
AT
Morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
Kate
Bennett
with
the
Boston
Housing
Authority,
we're
a
co-sponsor
of
the
project.
We
designated
that
the
developer
team,
it's
a
critical
project
to
our
low-income
seniors
and
disabled
folks
at
the
site
who
are
currently
living
in
a
deteriorated
building,
but
we're
also
thrilled
to
be
able
to
add
additional,
affordable
housing
to
the
site.
Thank
you.
AU
AD
Good
morning
my
name
is
George
Lee
with
keep
it
hundred
for
a
real,
affordable
housing,
racial
justice
and
just
four
quick
points
on
why
we
support
this
project.
It's
in
the
plan,
GP
Rox
area,
and
so
for
things
we
were
looking
at
where
one
doesn't
meet
the
standards
of
plan
GT
rocks
and
the
developers
that
work
to
make
the
design
meet.
AD
The
guidelines
of
plan
GP
Rox
number
two:
there's
a
intention
in
plan
GPT
rocks
to
prevent
displacement
and
to
make
sure
that
developers
aren't
trying
to
build
new
developments
while
kicking
out
tenants
down
the
road
and
urban
edge
is
not
in
the
business
of
displacing
folks
and
raising
rents
and
folks
to
displace
them
number
three
there's
a
lot
of
units
that
are
affordable
to
folks
at
the
lowest
income
levels,
making
less
than
30,000
a
year.
Your
energy
is
applied
for
vouchers
that
would
make
up
to
20
units
available
at
those
income.
AD
Ranges
are
slightly
above
and
number
four.
This
is
being
built
on
public
land,
but
it's
a
hundred
percent
affordable
and
so
it's
very
clear
example:
public
land
for
public
good.
So
we're
just
bringing
these
up
because
we'll
probably
be
back
here
in
the
future,
as
other
developments
come
forward
and
plan
G
few
rocks
that
don't
meet
all
those
four
criteria,
but
we're
glad
that
this
one
does
so
we
stand
in
support.
Thank
you.
AN
AV
Chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
juan
torres
and
I'm
here
representing
the
community
builders,
part
of
the
development
team
and
we're
here
I
like
to
my
record
and
unsupportive
of
the
project
he
worked
with
urban
edge,
as
well
as
partnered
with
them
and
multiple
projects
within
the
city.
Thank
you.
AW
My
name
is
cynthia
jones.
I
am
a
resident
of
new
academy
estates
as
well
as
a
community
leader.
I
live
within
a
half
of
a
mile
radius
of
the
development
that
is
looking
at
to
take
place.
I
stand,
I
am
in
support
of
urban
edges
goals
and
what
they're
accomplishing
on
a
personal
note,
there's
families
that
I
know
that
have
been
displaced
through
all
of
the
building
that
is
happening
in
the
community,
which
is
not
affordable
for
the
people
that
are
in
the
community.
AW
AX
My
name
is
Eric
Rothschild
I'm,
a
senior
community
organizer
at
the
Jamaica
Plain
Neighborhood
Development
Corporation
I'm
here
in
support
of
urban
edges
proposal
and
we've
been
working
in
partnership
with
urban
edge
on
the
site.
For
the
past
two
years,
there's
been
a
robust
community
process
over
90
coffee
hours.
Discussing
this
and
as
part
of
our
mission,
we
support
the
addition,
affordable
housing
in
that
gentrifying
JP.
So
thank
you.
AY
Good
morning
my
name
is
olya
elcome
I
am
the
community
engagement
office.
Sorry
I'm
the
associate
director
of
community
engagement.
We
will
continue
to
work
with
the
residents
who
move
into
this
new
development,
providing
services
and
assistance
and
continuing
to
progress
their
economic
development.
Hopefully,
when
the
project
is
built.
Thank
you.
AZ
BA
BB
K
BC
A
Anybody
here
to
speak
in
opposition
now
before
we
make
a
decision.
I
know,
there's
a
lot
of
you
that
we've
heard
from
we
have
other
cases
on
our
docket.
So
we
please
ask
you
to
leave
the
room
quietly.
If
you
can
so
we
can
move
on
with
our
agenda.
Okay,
take
your
conversations
outside
when
you're
done
may
I
have
a
motion.
Please
the.
B
Finally
makes
case
calling
boa
seven:
five:
six,
nine
nine
nine
71
to
73
Berkeley
Road.
This
is
a
subdivide,
an
existing
lot
of
eight
thousand
eight
hundred
and
eighty
six
square
feet
to
two
separate
Lots
lot,
one
to
be
4422
square
feet
with
the
existing
three
family
to
remain
in
law
to
be
vacant.
Four
thousand
six
hundred
4464
square
feet.
The
violation
is
article
55,
section:
nine.
The
new
proposed
block
beats
an
excessive
FBI
for
an
existing
building
article
55
section:
nine.
B
BD
Being
proposed
is
we
have
an
existing
three
family
I've
handed
up
the
photographs,
that's
on
a
double
lot
in
on
Brookley
Road
in
Jamaica
Plain,
the
Lots
on
that
side
of
Brookley
road
are
all
50
feet
in
width.
I
have
a
copy
of
the
1926
subdivision
plan
that
shows
that
these
two
Lots
are
typical
of
the
street
and
what's
being
proposed.
BD
Essentially
at
this
time,
is
just
to
legalize
the
three
family
on
those
two
separately
deep
described
lots
over
the
years
the
lots
have
been
in
common
ownership,
and
so
they've
merged,
processing
and
zoning
purposes,
and
what
we'd
like
to
do
is
just
simply
divide
them
back
into
Lots,
13
and
12,
as
they
were
in
the
1926
plan,
and
the
purpose
is
that
the
the
longtime
owners
are
planning
to
sell
the
three
family
house
on
its
separate
lot
and
retain
the
vacant
lot
for
future
development
for
a
home
for
themselves.
Just.
A
BD
Q
Z
Q
B
Is
to
change
Archie
from
two
residential
units
and
stores
the
three
residential
units
and
restaurant
with
takeout,
also
to
erect
a
fourth
storey
edition
with
roof
decks
the
violations
article,
fifty
section
43
Osprey
parking
is
insufficient
article.
Fifty
section
11,
the
flirty,
a
ratio
is
excessive.
Article.
Fifty
section
11
use
will
open
spaces
insufficient
in
article
fifty
section.
11
array
is
insufficient
name
and
address
full
erected.
Please.
I
Daniel
Toscana
from
tray
go
into
ska
no
LLP
attorneys
at
law
located
at
15,
Broad
Street,
Boston,
Mass
Oh
to
109
theta
I
represents
that
goth
was
to
my
far
right
who's.
The
owner
of
the
property
located
at
10:27
Tremont
Street
to
my
immediate
right,
is
the
architect
of
the
property
of
dope
Arquette.
I
So
we're
seeking
your
support
to
change
the
legal
occupancy
from
what
it
is.
It's
currently
to
residential
units
in
a
retail
store
to
three
residential
units
and
restaurant
with
take
oh
right
now,
these
the
existing
first
floor
has
the
retail
space
and
the
unit
number
one
which
extends
into
the
basement.
What
we're
gonna
do
is
change
the
first
floor
in
basement
to
the
restaurant
use,
sit-down
restaurant
and
the
downstairs
will
be
used
for
as
the
kitchen
area,
prep
area
and
storage
up
on
the
first
floor
will
be.
The
seating
area.
I
Hostess
area
in
the
dining
bar
for
the
restaurant
is
the
second
floor,
and
the
third
floor
will
remain
as
two
bedroom
units.
We
will
be
adding
a
bathroom
so
there
currently
two
bedroom,
one
bath
they'll,
be
proposes
two
bedroom
two
bath
and
the
fourth
floor.
Addition
will
be
a
two
bedroom
two
bath
residential
unit
as
well.
By
filing
this
petition,
we
did
trigger
some
violations.
The
off
street
parking,
the
off
street
parking
was
short.
One
pockets
bought
one
pockets
bought
for
a
unit
which
would
be
for
the
new
residential
unit.
I
On
the
fourth
floor
for
the
restaurant,
we
are
in
a
parking,
restricted,
restricted
parking
district,
so
there
are
no
parking
requirements
for
the
restaurant
space.
The
floor
area
ratio
in
this
district,
which
is
the
greater
Roxbury
economic
development
area,
is
two
we
are
already
discipling
violation.
We
are
at
three
point
six
by
adding
that
addition.
We
are
going
to
four
point
three.
The
open
space
of
this
requirement
is
this
fifty
square
feet
per
for
a
unit.
Currently
there
is
seventy
square
feet
for
unit
number
two
of
live.
A
BE
I
A
I
I
I
So
we
are
in
violation
for
the
additional
unit
that
we're
proposing.
We
need
to
provide
one
parking
space.
There
is
no
interior
parking,
so
we
were
seeking
relief
for
that
one
pocket
spot
for
the
restaurant
because
we
are
in
a
restricted
parking
district.
There's
no
requirement
for
any
parking
per
seat
in
that
area.
I
BF
I
A
BH
Morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
Joshua
McFadden
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services
at
this
moment
like
to
go
on
record
and
support
the
project
we
had
an
abundance
meeting
back
in
December
I
would
like
to
move
forward
hello.
Would
you
understand
the
concerns
about
traffic
mitigation
and
parking
in
the
area?
That's
right
now
we're
in
support.
A
A
BI
BJ
K
B
D
A
D
Which
Mariinsky
I'm
an
attorney
with
the
business
address
at
350,
West,
Broadway
and
South
Boston?
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
this
is
only
complying
matter
that
is
here
for
iPod.
Only.
However,
there
is
a
substantial
amount
of
opposition
to
the
project.
What
my
client
would
like
to
do
is
defer
and
working
with
the
butters.
You
know
the
neighbors
and
try
to
arrive
at
a
design
scheme
that
is
satisfactory
to
the
neighborhood
motion
to
approve
deferral.
A
A
AU
A
A
Good
morning,
the
board
of
appeal
for
Tuesday
for
every
27th
is
back
in
session
just
so
remind
to
please
make
sure
that
your
cell
phones
are
off,
in
conformance
with
the
Open
Meeting
Law.
This
meeting
is
being
live-streamed.
If
you
have
conversations,
please
take
them
outside
of
the
room.
The
acoustics
in
here
are
very
poor
and,
if
you're
here
to
speak
in
support
or
in
opposition
of
to
a
project
I
just
want
to.
Let
you
know
that
we
take
everybody's
comments.
The
communities,
the
VRA
is
the
mayor's
office
all
under
advisement.
A
B
You,
madam
chair
the
first
case
at
10:30,
boa
seven,
eight
one,
eight
one,
five,
fifty
clap
Street.
This
is
a
change
of
use
for
an
existing
building
to
medical
marijuana
treatment
center,
the
interior,
only
renovation
for
the
new
business
and
there's
no
structural
work
violations.
Article
65,
section,
fifteen
miracle,
medical
marijuana
treatment
center
is
a
conditional
use
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
BK
The
board,
my
name,
is
Mike
Ross
I'm,
an
attorney
with
Prince
low-cal
I'm.
Here
with
my
client
and
I,
say
jail
Holdings,
led
by
the
chief
operating
officer,
aden,
o
donovan
to
his
right,
co-counsel,
a
JD
berry
and
to
my
left,
our
architect,
Erik
Robinson
from
roadie
architects,
we're
here
to
present
50
clap
Street
for
a
conditional,
unis
apartment.
50
clap
is
an
existing
six
thousand
square
foot
building
and
our
intent
is
to
put
a
medical
marijuana
dispensary
at
the
location.
BK
This
matter
was
approved
in
a
letter
of
non
opposition
by
the
Boston
City
Council
on
December
13
2017.
The
building
itself
will
be
open
from
the
hours
of
8
a.m.
to
8
p.m.
there
are
nine
parking
spaces
on
site
for
use
of
patients.
We
are
proud
to
have
the
support
of
the
John
McCormick
Civic
Association
in
Dorchester,
as
well
as
the
New
Market
Business
Association.
A
A
BK
Our
Aiden
is
happy
to
go
further
into
that,
for
you
I
just
I,
don't
know
when
they
leave
and
we'll
be
working
with
the
glass
of
Transportation
Department.
We
will
be
working
with
them
to
create
a
left
turn
only
if
you
take
a
right
turn
there.
It
will
bring
you
back
to
the
neighborhood
and
back
onto
Boston,
Street
and
probably
more
congestion,
and
we
want
to
feed
into
so
we're
comfortable
doing
a
left
term.
Only
right
there
were
working
with
DT
D
to
make
that
happen.
Q
BK
That's
correct
that
is
correct.
We
have
worked
out
a
lease
with
our
abiding
neighbor
along
our
buddy
neighbor
and
we
will
be
leasing.
You
know
it's
not
a
requirement
of
the
zoning
or
of
the
license.
We
have
worked
out
of
agreement
with
that
neighbor
to
lease
that
strip
of
land
and
to
incorporate
it
visually
into
our
site.
BK
BK
BK
Q
AI
BK
BK
BK
AK
BK
The
staff
will
not
be
allowed
to
park
there,
we're
gonna
work
out
a
shuttle
service
with
the
staff,
as
we've
done
in
other
locations.
The
operators
too
worried
about
the
operator
ATM
Devin,
is
originally
from
Massachusetts.
Originally
from
the
Greater
Boston
area
went
to
Colorado
a
while
ago
learned
that
this
industry
became
proficient
wound
up.
Running
multiple
dispensaries
in
Colorado
came
back
here,
he's
been
permitted
in
Watertown
Fitchburg.
This
is
his
third
proposal
at
each
of
these
locations.
A
BK
Proposal
here
and
I
should
probably
add
there
a
couple
provisos
that
were
being
that
we
were
suggesting
that
we
for
the
for
the
boards,
entertainment
based
on
the
community's
request
we've.
Actually,
this
is
actually
just.
This
is
not
one
of
those
provisos,
but
it
can
be
important
to
sees
it
fit,
and
that
is
we're
gonna,
24-hour
seven
at
a
seven-day-a-week
security
on-site,
not
electric
security,
but
human
security
on
site,
and
that
will
be
a
combination
of
our
own
personnel
and
Boston
police
police
details.
BK
Such
time
as
we
2020
or
one
year
of
operation,
he's
agreed
to
never
allow
any
kind
of
on-site
consumption
you
may
have
heard
of
in
the
future.
That's
not
these
cafes
and
he's
he's
agreed
to
never
do
that,
never
applied
for
that
and
he's
agreed
to
a
minimum
transaction
price
of
forty
dollars
per
transaction.
The
theory
behind
that
is
that
we're
we're
very
close
to
mass
out
we've
been
working
very
closely
with
the
new
Market
Square
Business,
Association
and
McCormick.
BK
BK
BK
A
L
BC
Yes
and
she
had
members
of
the
board
Gary
Walker
Electrical
Workers
Local
103,
like
to
speak
in
strong
support.
I've
watched
this
thing
go
through
the
process
and
a
very
extensive
process.
They've
answered
many
questions
over
over
that
course
of
time
and
I'm
very
happy
with
the
result.
They're
also
committed
to
us
very
early
on
to
the
members
of
the
building
trades
that
we
will
work
with
this
on
the
site
and
provide
the
jobs
for
our
neighborhoods.
AM
Good
morning,
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
Grady's
and
I'm,
a
Dorchester
resident
and
as
well
as
a
mccormick
member
and
I'm
in
favor
of
this
project.
Thank.
C
Q
C
B
BL
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board
attorney
Nix
Azula,
McDermott
quilty
and
Miller
28
State
Street,
Suite
8:02,
here
in
Boston
with
me
to
my
immediate
right,
is
Noam
Kleinman,
who
is
a
regional
vice
president
of
Achilleas
real
estate
management
to
my
second
right
is
rich
Rankin
from
CI
design.
He's
the
architect
on
the
project
to
my
furthest.
Right
is
mr.
mark
Owen
who's,
the
construction
manager
for
a
keyless
a
little
bit
of
background.
As
you
look
through
the
handout
that
we
put
together
on
the
project.
Carson
Towers
is
at
14
10,
Columbia
Road.
BL
It
is
a
17-story
153
unit,
waterfront
apartment
tower.
It
was
built
in
1973
it's
about
45
years
old.
The
property
is
under
new
ownership.
The
gentleman
from
Achilles
here
with
me
today
purchased
the
building
in
December
of
2016,
and
what
now
that
they've
owned
the
property
for
about
a
year
a
little
over
a
year,
they're
proposing
to
update
and
the
building
reconfigured
the
public
spaces
in
the
building
on
the
first
and
third
floors,
as
well
as
renovate
137
of
the
hundred
and
fifty
three
units
and
add
an
additional
three-bedroom
unit
on
the
third
floor.
L
BM
B
AL
Q
L
BM
Q
B
Boa
seven:
seven,
four,
eight
eight
zero
123
G
Street.
This
is
a
construction
of
196
square
feet,
a
roof
deck,
an
installation
of
structural
steel
beams
with
steel
tubes
in
place
four
by
four
posts
to
be
installed
with
a
six
inch
carriage
bolt.
The
deck
frame
is
to
be
constructed
from
two
by
twelve
pressure,
treated
lumber,
an
installation
of
Simpson
joist
hangers.
The
violation
is
article
68,
section,
29,
roof
structural
restrictions,
an
article
68
section,
8,
the
side
yard
setback.
Is
it
in
sufficient
name,
an
address,
no
directly.
BN
Are
proposing
to
add
196
square
foot,
roof
deck
to
our
property?
We
have
engaged
reputable
architect
and
a
reputable
contractor
that
does
a
lot
of
work
in
South
Boston
and
we
work
very
hard
to
make
it
conform
to
what's
typical
in
the
community
to
make
it
look
nice
and
to
invest
in
our
home.
We've
had
a
nut
butters
meeting
where
we
have.
BN
BN
We
had
enough
owners
meeting
in
December
with
or
no
issues
raised,
and
we've
brought
several
letters
of
support
from
our
neighbors
with
no
no
issues
with
dissent.
The
first
issue,
article
68,
section
29,
roof
structure
restriction
is
a
height
restriction
and
that
had
to
do
with
a
deficiency
in
the
original
plan
submitted.
We
have
on
your
second
page
of
your
packet
in
the
cloud
there.
You
can
see
that
this
is
within
the
one
foot
within
the
the
zoning
regulations.
This
actually
conforms
it
just
wasn't
expressly
stated
in
the
original
design.
BN
The
second
is
article
68,
section,
8,
the
side
garden.
Sufficient,
we
believe
what's
proposed,
is
very
consistent
with
what
exists
in
the
neighborhood
and
I've
shown
several
photos
of
roof
decks
in
the
area,
including
our
own,
lower
roof
deck
in
our
house
with
a
common
wall
where
they
go
right
up
into
the
the
party
wall,
and
so
we
believe
this
conforms
to
what's
standard
for
the
neighborhood.
A
A
BN
L
B
Throwing
VOA
774
887
for
Jason
Terrace:
this
is
a
kitchen
roof
deck
install
393
square
feet
with
spiral,
staircase
sliding
to
a
window
install
and
removing
of
the
existing
deck
boards
and
back
deck
location,
an
installation
of
a
three
three
ten-foot,
concrete
footings:
structural
steel
beams
with
steel
tubes
and
plates
for
roof
deck
violations.
Article
68,
section,
29,
roof
structure,
restrictions,
article
68,
section,
8
side,
you
have
setback-
is
insufficient.
An
article
68
section
8,
Raigad
setback
is
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
Nico.
BO
Thank
you
good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board.
We
are
here
today
to
propose
a
285
square
foot,
roof
deck
as
well
as
a
108
square
foot
rear
deck
with
access
to
the
roof
by
a
spiral
staircase.
We
are
the
owners
and
residents
of
for
Jason
Terrace
have
ever
been
for
four
years
and
we're
looking
to
add
useable
outdoor
space
to
our
home,
to
enhance
our
quality
of
life
and
also
continue
to
invest
in
our
home
and
our
neighborhood.
BO
We
believe
that
our
request
for
relief
as
a
modest
one
and
our
plan
respects
and
conforms
with
the
existing
character
of
the
neighborhood.
We,
in
collaboration
with
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services,
we
held
an
abutters
meeting
on
December
16th.
We
continue
to
engage
our
neighbors
and
abutters
throughout
those
months.
Since
then,
we
have
submitted
several
letters
of
support
which
you
have
in
your
packet
as
well
and
to
our
knowledge,
we
have
not
heard
any
opposition
access.
BP
Just
to
address
the
violations
similar
to
the
last
case
of
123
G
Street,
the
first
violation
is
article
68,
section:
29
structure
restrictions,
the
issue.
There
was
again
that
proper
documentation
was
omission
missing
from
the
initial
submission
it
has
since
been
updated
at
10:10
and
we've
included
drawing
a
102,
corrects
that
and
provides
that
additional
detail.
So
we
do
meet
those
guidelines.
BP
The
second
is
article
16,
section,
8
side
yard
in
submission.
Again
it's
pretty
standard
with
the
violations
and
you
find
in
our
neighborhood.
We
actually
have
the
proper
setback
on
the
right-hand
side
of
the
building,
but
the
left
side
is
a
party
wall,
and
so
you
know
we're
seeking
to.
You
know,
get
relief
on
that
and
for
the
record
we
do
have
within
your
packet
written
support
from
the
neighbors
that
you
share,
that
party
hallway
and
then
finally
number
three
again.
It's
similar,
you
know
pretty
standard
for
our
neighborhood
really
hard
and
insufficient.
BP
A
L
BM
O
B
Your
next
case
calling
boa
seven,
seven,
nine
nine
three
three
five
seven
29
to
31
Ward
Street,
is
also
a
companion
case
of
Building
Code,
boa
seven,
seven,
nine,
three,
five,
eight
twenty
nine
thirty
one
Ward
Street.
This
is
erect
a
new
five
four-story.
Nine
residential
building
with
tall
parking
spaces
at
grade
and
roof
deck
building
is
to
contain
three
one-bedroom
units
and
six
two-bedroom
units.
BI
B
B
BL
Morning
again,
attorney
Nix
Azula,
McDermott
cruelty
and
Miller
28
State
Street
Suite
8:02
here
in
Boston
with
me
to
my
immediate
right,
is
David
O
Sullivan
from
O'sullivan
architects
he's
the
architect
in
the
project.
To
my
far
right
is
Ed
Daugherty,
who
is
the
developer
from
Ward
29-31
Ward
Street
LLC
we're
providing
to
you
some
plans,
as
well
as
a
memorandum
from
this
office
which
will
have
what
I'm
about
to
say
and
it
put
in
writing
for
you
all
as
well
a
little
bit
of
background.
BL
The
property
is
located
near
the
corner
of
ward
in
Preble
Street,
just
outside
of
Andrews
square,
it's
about
a
quarter
mile
or
so
from
the
MBTA
station
there,
and
our
proposal
is
to
demolish
an
existing
building
on
the
property
construct,
a
new
four-story
nine
unit,
multi-family
residential
building
on
site
parking
for
12
at
great
spaces
and,
as
mr.
secretary
mentioned,
is
a
3-1
bedroom
units
and
six
two-bedroom
units.
BL
BL
The
only
zoning
relief
that
the
project
requires
is
for
an
iPod
permit.
It
has
been
designed
in
a
way
so
as
to
comply
with
all
the
applicable
dimensional
parking
use
and
other
required
to
the
zoning
code,
and
we
passed
out
a
memorandum
from
my
office
stating
how,
in
fact
the
project
does
comply
with
the
iPod
and
the
requirements
of
the
iPod.
A
Q
E
E
A
BL
BI
BI
BI
BI
AD
A
AD
K
AU
AC
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
Paul
Sullivan
on
behalf
of
City
Council,
as
Michael
Flaherty
council,
eight
to
go
on
record
and
support.
However,
the
iPod
furthers
the
community
process
for
a
product
such
as
this,
its
intends
to
stop
the
Oh
development
of
certain
areas
of
the
neighborhood.
A
prior
to
this
scope
may
not
be
deemed
fit
for
a
different
part
of
the
neighbourhood.
However,
council
believes
that
this
product
is
a
fit
within
the
transforming
hinges.
AC
L
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board
John
Allison
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services.
We
would
like
to
go
on
up
as
a
on
record
in
opposition,
we
have
received
a
letter
of
opposition
as
I
believe
the
board
has
from
the
Android
square
Civic
Association.
There
is
a
lot
of
concern
about
primarily
about
the
decks
from
native
letters.
Thank
you.
BM
O
BL
If
I
can
yeah
so
as
stated
and
in
the
initial
discussion
of
about
you
know
summary
of
the
project,
the
roof
deck
is
300,
the
roof
deck
is
320
square
feet.
On
the
top
level,
it
is
a
private
roof
deck
for
only
one
of
the
units.
On
the
third
floor
on
the
top
floor,
excuse
me
it's
not
a
common
roof
deck,
so
you
know
we
need.
BL
You
know
in
order
to
be
zoning
compliant
that
open
space
is
calculated
to
be
included
in
that
calculation,
so
the
deck
is
needed
to
reach
our
open
space
calculation,
we're
happy
to
continue
to
work
with
the
community
and
with
the
BPD
a
through
design
review.
We've
also,
you
know,
we've
heard
those
concerns.
We
have
made
changes
to
the
building
other
than
the
roof
deck,
including
pulling
the
building
back,
adding
screening
and
buffering
to
the
front
and
other
amenities
to
the
building.
BL
We
also
did
agree
to
provide
screening
on
both
sides
of
this
roof
deck
on
both
the
horizontal,
both
sides
of
the
roof
deck
not
to
fund
the
back,
put
the
signs
to
help
with
any
noise
mitigation,
visibility,
issues
and
things
like
that.
The
roof
deck
is
in
the
in
the
back
of
the
building,
and
it
sits
in
a
spot
where
we
hope
that
it's
you
know
not
going
to
be
seen
from.
They
will
not
be
seen
from
the
street
and
the
fact
that
you
know
we're
proposing
to
add
screening
and
buffering
to
it
as
well.
A
BL
We've
had
a
constructive
dialogue
with
the
undersquare
and
all
the
elected
officials.
It's
been
a
it's
been
a
good
process.
We've
had
God
obtained
a
lot
of
feedback,
and
we've
tried
to
respond
to
that
as
as
we
possibly
could
I
do
think,
there's
opportunity
here
for
us
to
make
that
roof
decks
smaller
and
still
be
compliant
with
the
open
space
to
get
it
within
one
foot
above
the
open
space
compliant
requirement
again.
AB
Q
BQ
BL
Again,
the
idea
was
to
come
with
a
compliant
case,
I
think
there's
an
opportunity
to
work
with
the
community
and
come
back
with
a
non-compliant
case
with
zoning,
and
that
may
require
a
variance
from
open
space
or
a
variance
from
parking.
Of
course,
we'd
be
willing
to
do
that
always
but
I
think.
If
that
was
the
case,
we
would
be
coming
back
with
variances
to
the
zoning
code,
which
is
what
we
were
hoping
to
avoid
with
this.
You.
A
A
B
Calling
the
next
case
calling
VOA
seven
eight
two,
seven,
seven
528
F
Street:
this
is
a
raise,
a
wrist
shed
at
a
roof
deck
and
create
a
new
two-story
addition
in
the
ramp
and
renovate
the
existing
interior
violations
in
article
27
s,
Section
five
to
the
South,
Boston,
iPod
applicability,
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
Doug.
Y
Y
Y
Ma'am
there
I'm,
currently
the
building,
is
an
empty
shell,
he'd
like
to
put
on
a
two-story
addition
on
the
back
to
extend
both
the
living
space.
On
the
first
floor,
it's
a
mechanical
space
in
the
base
in
the
Credo
basement
form
the
pure
mechanical
and
then
extension
on
the
bedrooms.
On
the
second
floor,.
A
L
BM
A
A
BR
BR
Secondly,
the
during
demolition,
the
petition
wall
between
30th,
Street
and
28th
was
compromised
and
30th
Street
was
full
with
dust
and
I
spoke
with
the
billing
department
back
in
September,
and
the
contractor
was
supposed
to
get
back
in
touch
with
us
about
repointing.
That
wall
never
happened.
I
spoke
with
the
architect.
After
hearing
the
original
town
hearing,
we've
brought
that
up
to
them
also
never
called
back
I.
A
BR
A
Y
Y
BS
B
D
Morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
George.
Moran,
see
I'm
an
attorney
with
the
business
address.
350
West
Broadway
in
South
Boston
I'm
joined
at
the
table
by
my
client
Ryan
hunt,
madam
chair
members.
So
this
is
a
zoning
compliant
and
building
compliant
project
building
code
compliant
project.
D
It
calls
for
demolition
of
an
existing
two
family
building
on
a
loss
of
sixty
three
hundred
square
feet
at
37,
Farragut,
Road
and
so
on.
Boston
in
the
erection
of
the
new
four-story
eight
unit
residential
building.
Again
it
would
be
eight
units
of
those
eight
units.
Four
would
be
a
one-bedroom
units,
three
would
be
two
bedroom
units
and
one
would
be
a
three-bedroom
unit.
The
smallest
one-bedroom
units
are
881
and
80
883
square
feet.
D
The
two-bedroom
units
range
from
about
a
thousand
square
feet
to
eleven
or
twelve
hundred
square
feet
to
the
largest
two-bedroom
unit,
which
is
1524
square
feet
and
then,
finally,
on
the
setback.
Fourth
floor
of
the
building
would
be
a
1,700
square
force
three-bedroom
unit,
as
I
mentioned,
the
project
is
a
zoning
compliant.
It
is
just
within
a
green
belt
protection
overlay
district
about
20%
of
the
front
portion
of
the
site
is
captured
by
the
most
westerly
edge
of
the
500
foot
G
pod
limit
from
the
center
point
of
day.
D
Boulevard
the
building
does
not
front
or
touch
in
any
way
actually
day
Boulevard,
which
is
the
green
belt
roadway.
This
is
here
as
a
G,
pod
matter
and
I
point
out
for
the
record
and
as
I
believe.
As
the
board
knows,
Massachusetts
Superior
Court,
an
appeals
court
has
held
in
the
cases
of
k-ci
management
versus
board
of
Appeal
Mulligan
versus
Board
of
Appeal
cedarwood
development
versus
board
of
Appeal.
That
in
matters
of
jihad,
review
was
owned
and
compliant
project.
D
D
The
parking
is
accessed,
there
is
an
existing
curb
cut
on
the
site.
The
parking
is
accessed
by
a
curb
cut
on
the
left
side
of
the
building.
As
one
looks
at
the
building
sheet,
a
100
shows
the
basement
parking
plan
with
the
driveway
down
there,
then
six
spaces
arranged
against
the
rear
wall
of
the
building,
there's
adequate
maneuverability
room
in
the
middle,
and
then
there
are
four
compact
spaces
located
towards
the
front
portion
of
the
building
immediately
to
the
rear
of
the
trash
and
recycle
storage
area.
A
D
Their
front
balconies
if-if-if
board
members
look
at
the
sheet
AV
to
the
schematic
design.
You
can
in
fact
see
the
front
balconies
in
at
the
third
floor
level.
Above
the
front
facing
third
floor
roof
portion.
There
is
a.
There
are
balconies
there.
If
you
go
to
sheet
sheets.
Actually,
a
101
you'll
see
that
there's
a
balcony
or
a
porch
in
the
front.
On
the
second
floor
level
and
on
the
third
floor
level,
there
are
balconies
in
the
rear
on
both
levels.
A
D
In
addition
to
a
truly
green
landscaped,
open
space,
which
is
shown
on
sheet
a
100,
there's
1843
square
feet
of
a
landscaped
open
space
in
the
20-foot
radius
setback,
as
well
as
on
the
the
rear.
Most
portion
of
the
2/3
foot
side,
yard
setbacks.
There
is
also
she'd
a
102
on
the
fourth
floor
level
is
also
a
front
terrace
roof
terrace,
because
the
building
is
set
back
at
that
level
and
also
on
the
rear
adjacent
to
the
master
bedroom
of
the
three-bedroom
unit.
A
K
L
A
K
BM
AC
O
BT
On
the
corner,
836
East,
Third,
Street
I,
also
in
the
first
word,
eight
unit
says
this
to
family.
There
now
he's
next
to
a
three
family,
and
my
neighborhood
was
just
third
Street.
We
have
12
singles
five
two
families
in
six,
three
families
he's
bringing
like
a
mini
hotel
to
us.
We
don't
need
it.
It's
too,
then
we
have
four
projects
coming
to
that
one
block
the
one
was
deferred
earlier
today,
844
he
stood.
BT
BU
V
Mcdonough
54
PA,
Street
I've
lived
in
this
two
block
area,
my
whole
life
and
this
development
of
taking
away
single
family
in
two
family
homes
to
make
apartment
condos
is
just
killing
us.
Yes,
they
provide
one
point
whatever
it
is
parking,
but
there's
always
more
than
one
car
for
these
condos.
It's
a
quality
of
life.
All
these
buildings
go
up
high
or
take
a
light-year
away
from
us.
Most
of
these
people
in
this
room
have
lived
there
all
of
our
lives.
We
want
to
stay
there
and
finish
our
lives.
V
BW
Sorry,
Patricia
O'keefe,
a
41,
East,
Third,
Street
I
oppose
opposes
project
when
we
had
the
first
about
his
meeting.
The
original
proposal
was
for
8
units
was
everybody
was
in
opposition
where
there
was
a
second
about
his
meeting,
which
they
approp
proposed
a
six
unit.
Now
they're
going
back
to
the
original
eight
I'm
in
opposition
to
whether
it's
a
six
or
an
eight
unit,
building
I'm
a
lifelong
resident
I'm
a
third-generation
to
all
my
house
at
8:41,
East,
Third,
Street,.
BX
My
name
is
Mary
Bulger
and
I
have
lived
at
828,
East
3rd
Street
for
well
over
40
years
and
all
of
a
sudden
our
neighborhood
is
disappearing.
This
is
not
necessary
and
I
wish.
You
would
act
to
help
us
keep
things
the
way
they
are
I
know
you
have
to
have
change
and
we
understand
when
change
is
good
to
me.
This
change
is
unnecessary
and
it
doesn't
help
anyone.
Thank.
D
I'm
sure
it's
a
zoning
compliant
matter,
unlike
the
844
846
third
street
case,
which
was
deferred.
This
is
not
subject
to
why
pod
this
is
G
pod
compliance.
Only
I,
don't
want
to
sound,
like
the
proverbial
broken
record.
I
think
the
board
is
is,
is
well
aware
of
the
limits
to
its
discretionary
authority
to
deny
G
pod
matters.
Rather,
the
courts
have
clearly
held
that
the
board
may
only
impose
the
reasonable
site
plan
conditions.
D
B
Calling
that
case
calling
VOA
seven
five,
four
three:
eight
zero
55
to
57
Bream
astray,
there's
also
a
companion
case,
boa
seven,
five,
four
three
eight
eight
sixty-three
269
brevis
tray.
This
is
55
to
57
Bremer
alterations
of
an
existing
two-story
single-family
residence
in
use
as
an
elementary
school
includes
the
reconstruction
of
one
story,
structure,
accessibility,
improvements
and
adding
a
second
means
of
egress
in
interior
modifications.
Violation
is
article
8,
section,
760,
Elementary
School
is
a
conditional
use,
article
32,
section,
9,
G,
pod
and
Portsmouth.
B
This
is
for
63
to
69
Verma
Street.
This
is
daddy
three-story
addition
to
an
extreme
extent
courtyard
above
a
second
floor,
roof
and
redeveloped.
The
remaining
courtyard
space
throughout,
though
you
extends
existing
elementary
school
use
and
requires
a
variance.
The
violations,
article
15
section,
1,
the
floor
area
ratio
is
excessive
in
article
9,
section,
9
wand,
extension,
reconstruction,
non-conforming
use,
building,
name
and
address
Fuller
actively
good.
A
BY
I'm
gonna
start
with
63
69
Brimmer
Street.
This
is
the
existing
school
building,
the
proposals
to
add
a
three-story
addition
of
952
square
feet.
The
zoning
in
this
neighborhood
is
h.265.
As
mr.
fortune
stated,
the
variance
is
our
FA.
Our
zoning
in
this
neighborhood
is
to
the
current
fai
of
this
building
is
three
point.
Five
four
in
the
proposal
before
you
do
is
increase
the
FAI
by
0.14.
So
the
proposal
will
be
three
three
point.
Six
eight.
The
other
violation
is
mr.
fortune
pointed
out,
is
that
Elementary
School
is
a
conditional
use.
BY
So
it's
an
extension
of
a
non-conforming
use
and
we're
looking
to
use
the
outdoor.
The
courtyard
is
outdoor
space
to
the
school.
We
have
had
several
neighborhood
meetings.
We
have
a
butter
meetings
as
well
as
a
meeting
before
the
Beacon
Hill
Civic
Association,
the
Beacon
Hill
Civic
Association
provided
the
board
with
a
letter
of
support
or
not
a
bit
opposition.
Additionally,
I
have
proved
that
I
have
provided
the
board
this
afternoon.
More
than
60
letters
of
support,
including
support
from
all
of
others,
with
exception
of
one.
A
BY
Will
not
this
date
the
proposal
before
you
just
by
way
of
history,
this
building
has
been
a
school
for
over
a
hundred
years.
Initially
it
was
the
Brimmer
school
and
then
Brimmer
and
may
merged.
It
was
a
berm
a
school.
Then
it
became
Burdette
College
and
then
it
became
Emerson
College,
and
these
folks
bought
this
15
years
ago
in
new
Tran
turned
into
an
elementary
school.
So
the
proposals
before
you,
this
addition,
as
well
as
the
conversion
of
a
single-family
house
to
school
use,
is
only
to
provide
more
facilities
for
the
current
students.
G
BZ
Or
just
saw
her
at
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
servants.
At
this
time
we
would
like
to
go
on
the
record
in
support.
They
did
have
a
very
favorable
abutters
meeting
with
a
lot
of
the
residents
came
out,
showing
their
support,
even
the
questions
that
were
asked.
One
of
them
you've
asked
herself.
It
was
in
regards
to
the
enrollment.
If
that's
going
to
be
increasing,
they've
come
on
the
record
so
that
it's
not,
they
have
displayed
a
great
sense
of
partnership
and
community
efforts
on
their
behalf
with
the
community.
BZ
So
everyone's
very
excited
about
this
happening.
We
do
have
one
a
butter
who's
made
it
known
that
it
is
in
complete
opposition
to
the
project.
Their
lawyers
are
at
the
moment
trying
to
work
out
a
favorable
agreement,
but
as
it
stands,
he's
the
only
one
opposition
everyone
else
is
in
support.
So
thank
you.
CA
AL
My
name
is
Paul
Millberry
I
live
at
the
21
beaver
place
just
around
the
corner
from
the
park
street
school.
We
are
totally
supportive
of
what
seems
like
fairly
minor
increase
in
the
fer
ratio.
To
three
point:
six
eight
Park
Street
School
has
been
a
wonderful
neighbor
to
us
since
moving
into
the
neighborhood
more
than
a
decade
ago,
as
abutters
before
they
moved
in,
we
were
asked
what
was
important
to
us.
We
asked
for
certain
concessions
around
traffic
flow
and
parking.
They
agreed
and
they've
been
compliant
since
since
the
day
one
so
we're
very
supportive.
AP
K
BC
K
CB
A
CB
CB
63
69,
which
is
which
is
as
as
mr.
Houdini,
expressed
an
expansion
of
15
feet
into
an
existing
courtyard.
If
you
will
my
clients,
property,
the
rear
of
his
property
currently
looks
out
into
that
courtyard.
This,
the
the
expansion
would
bring
as
you
look
at
from
the
rear
of
his
property,
the
nearest
wall
of
the
school
to
the
right
is
15
feet
away.
CB
So
we
were
opposed
to
this
for
the
two
reasons
of
the
increase
in
the
FA
R
and
the
increase
and
the
use
of
the
courtyard
in
2003.
The
school
did
obtain
relief
from
FA
our
to
go
to
add
to
do
an
addition
at
that
time.
But
at
that
point
the
addition
was
for
accessibility,
safety
purposes
and
also
did
not
change
the
envelope
of
the
building
at
all.
CB
AP
BY
Sure
Holly's
rest
that,
as
I
stated
from
the
beginning,
this
is
we
did
everything
I
could
possibly
think
of
to
reach
an
agreement
with
dis
about
her
I
have
never
ran
into
a
situation
like
this,
the
person
who's
opposed
and
turning
her
shields
client.
He
addresses
him
as
the
neighbor.
He
has
never
moved
into
this
building
this
building
that
he
owns.
If
you
guys
have
it
on
your
computers,
is
a
hole
in
the
ground
he
knocked
the
building
down,
so
he
bought
a
building
you
knocked
it.
BY
BY
He
doctor
everything
down,
except
for
one
wall,
so
it's
a
a
wall
that
has
to
would
have
to
be
moved
back
almost
four
feet
and
we
reached
out
to
him
said
you
know:
you're
gonna
have
to
go
before
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals.
Just
as
we
are,
let's
sit
down
and
try
to
work
this
out,
we
offered
a
buffing,
a
buffering,
some
sort
of
plantings
offense
something
to
allow
him
privacy,
because
that's
what
he
said.
BY
A
BY
Oh,
and
also
can
I
just
address
the
one
thing
that
he
brought
up
in
the
decision
that
the
board
wrote
back
in
2003.
It
said
that
the
school
the
activities
will
be
kept
inside
and
the
activities
had
been
kept
inside.
What
this
is
is
quiet,
enjoyment,
we're
not
talking
about
going
outside
and
playing
basketball
or
playing
dodgeball.
This
is
a
teacher
wants
to
go
out,
have
a
cup
of
coffee
and
lunch
outside
or
if
a
teacher
wants
to
go
out
and
read
a
book
to
the
young
children.
That's
what
it
is.
That's
not
activities.
A
B
B
B
CC
B
CC
A
B
B
You
much
calling
the
next
case
calling
VOA
seven
five,
four
zero:
two
one:
thirteen
Concord
Square
this
within
a
private
garden
and
a
short
retaining
wall
and
backfill
degree,
two
parking
spaces
violation
is
article
64,
section,
nine
usable,
open
spaces,
insufficient
article
64,
section,
36,
voss,
tree
parking,
design,
the
size,
the
access
drive
and
maneuverability
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
BS
BS
BS
I
mentioned
the
space
and
the
size
access
drive-in
first
address
these
two
issues.
I
would
like
to
point
out
the
following
facts:
all
the
49
townhouses
that
are
the
back
of
each
two
parking
spots,
with
the
exception
of
our
building
and
one
other
network.
Without
that
other
neighbor
has
a
garden
you
can
see
on
the
exhibit
number
one
a
picture
of
a
Google
map.
BS
A
BS
S
A
CD
Afternoon,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
faceis
Sharif
with
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services
on
we
held
an
on-site
abutters
meeting,
and
there
was
not
a
single
person
who
attended
that
was
in
support
of
this
proposal.
There
was
a
city
light
that
was
moved
a
couple
months
before
this
permit
application
that
caused
I
that
was
moved
towards
another
neighbor's
parking
space,
which
now
causes
a
little
bit
of
an
impairment
for
them
to
back
in
and
out
of
that,
I've
received
over
a
dozen
emails
and
letters
in
regards
to
this
proposal.
CD
All
in
opposition
they're,
on
the
record,
with
the
board,
we've
asked
the
proponent
to
work
with
the
neighbors
to
come
to
some
type
of
compromise,
either
around
the
light,
and
also
the
access
to
that
rear
of
all
of
the
alleyways
in
the
south
end
are
incredibly
narrow.
It
really
does
require
neighbors
to
work
with
one
another
in
terms
of
accessing
those
spaces.
CD
CE
Romanelli
I
live
directly
next
door,
11
Concord
square
and
that's
where
the
light
was
moved
to
and
I
brought
pictures
there
in
my
email
touched
on.
But
if
you
look
at
the
email
you
can
see
there's
a
Google
Maps
from
prior
to
moving
it
and
then
a
current
photo.
Where
you
see
it's
now
on
our
property
and
I
think
they
had
to
use
that
in
order
to
make
the
proposal
work.
So
we're
just
saying:
move
it
back
and
then
submit
your
proposal
how
it
was
because
we
rent
that
place,
knowing
that
we
have
that
spot.
CE
A
CE
BS
BS
B
A
B
CF
Mountain
chair
members
of
the
board
attorney
Derek
small
of
a
business.
Just
a
15,
Broad
Street
Boston
Mass,
go
to
109
with
me,
is
Michael
Fox,
si
eye
and
horizon
madam
chair.
We
are
here
today
secure
relief
to
change
the
occupancy
of
the
building
to
include
wireless
communications
equipment
on
the
new
property.
The
zoning
sub
district
is
h.265,
and
in
that
district
the
violation
is
a
rooftop
antenna
is
a
conditional
use
of
a
second
condition.
His
permit.
BU
So
the
site
plan,
what
we're
looking
to
do
is
there's
already
two
existing
stairwells
that
go
up
to
the
rooftop
and
we're
looking
to
extend
those
existing
stairwells
with
match
up
there's.
Currently,
the
gray
material
we're
going
to
put
up
a
gray,
fiberglass
material
that
allows
two
antennas.
Those
are
the
four
by
three
by
seven
like
I,
said:
there'll
be
two
of
those.
A
BU
For
the
service
for
our
needs,
we
need
to
be
as
well
as
possible
we're
looking
to
cover
that
short
amount
section
on
mobility,
Street,
there's
a
real
capacity
issue
there,
where
people
are
unable
to
use
their
phones.
The
taller
buildings
would
not
work
because
they
broadcast
our
signal
too
far
and
during
the
site
selection
I
stuck
to
this
building,
because
it
really
has
very
minimal
views
from
the
street.
As
you
can
see.
BU
A
CF
Just
for
the
record,
with
regards
to
community
process
on
October
12th,
we
had
a
novartis
meeting
sponsored
by
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services,
where
funders
showed
up
all
in
support
and
on
November
the
8th
be
appeared
before
the
cosec
Association,
who
gave
us
a
book
of
non
opposition
or
supporters.
I
don't
see.
BZ
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board
just
saw
her
at
the
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood
Services.
At
this
time,
I
would
like
to
go
on
record
and
support.
They
have
met
with
the
Beacon
Hill
Civic
Association
and
they've
gone
on.
The
record
they've
submitted
a
letter
of
non
opposition.
The
only
thing
that
they've
asked
is
that
we
take
into
consideration
not
approving
any
more
of
these
wireless
antennas
within
the
historical
district.
BZ
E
BU
E
BU
B
Boa
seven
nine
one,
four,
seven
six
91
299
Causeway
Street.
This
is
a
bill
that
approximately
a
thousand
square
feet
of
existing
retail
units
face
on
the
first
low
level.
The
space
is
proposed
to
be
a
coffee
shop,
violation,
thought
achill,
46,
section
9,
a
violation
description
is
conditional.
Take
out
this
conditional,
you
name
an
address
for
the
record.
Please
hello!.
CG
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
Rashi
monolith
and
with
McDermott,
quilty
and
Miller
with
what
you're
what
is
about
to
be
passed
out.
Our
letters
of
support
from
the
downtown
North
Association,
as
well
as
some
renderings
of
the
proposed
site
with
me,
is
Manish
Patel
of
he's,
looking
to
put
in
a
coffee
shop
at
the
site
and
build
out
the
existing
retail
space.
It's
been
vacant
for
about
a
year
and
so
that
increased
business
will
bring
some
needed
economy
to
the
area.
BQ
Q
CH
G
B
You
calling
boa
78414
to
283
to
285
Hanover
Street.
This
is
a
change
of
architect
from
a
three
family
dwelling
and
takeout
restaurant
to
a
three
family
dwelling
in
restaurant
with
seating
number
37
violation
is
article
54,
section
12
restaurant
is
a
conditional
use,
naman,
add
just
full
directed
please.
I
Thank
you,
dan
Toscano
from
Drago
and
Toscano
law
offices
located
at
58,
Boston
Mass
here
representing
the
mr.
and
mrs.
Pollino
to
my
far
right
of
the
living
owners
of
the
property
located
at
283
Hanover
Street,
which
is
located
in
the
Hanover
commercial.
It's
the
community
commercial
sub
district.
We
are
caging
seeking
to
change
the
use
of
this
property
from
a
takeout
restaurant
takeout
restaurant
in
three
residential
units
to
restaurant
with
seating
in
the
three
residential
units.
I
As
you
can
see
on
the
first
floor,
is
just
a
a
site
of
the
existing
property
which
is
you're
looking
at
where
it
says
Pinkberry.
That's
the
building
that
mr.
and
mrs.
Pollino,
recently
purchased
and
they're
looking
to
change.
I
was
a
yogurt
shop
and
there
was
takeout
only.
We
want
to
put
a
surprise,
no
surprise.
Italian
restaurant
there
so
tell
you
a
little
bit
of
Oh
mr.
and
mrs.
Pollino
they've,
been
in
the
restaurant
business
for
40
years,
they've
owned
and
operated
restaurants
outside
the
city
of
Boston.
They
currently
owner
in
operating
room.
I
Polly
knows
restaurant
located
in
French
Street
and
the
not
then
Boston
around
the
corner.
They
recently
purchased
this
property
and
they
want
to
operate
another
location.
It's
gonna
be
a,
although
we
do
have
in
the
north
end
a
homemade
pasta.
This
is
gonna,
be
a
unique
strictly
only
homemade
pasta
is
gonna,
be
prepared
on
site
and
sold
at
this
restaurant
and
nothing
else.
So
only
homemade
pastas
we're
hoping
that
you
would
support
the
changes.
The
30
seat,
restaurant.
This.
A
I
A
CH
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board
Morrell
and
the
mayor's
office
in
neighborhood
services,
we
would
like
to
go
on
record
and
support
we
held
in
a
butters
meeting
on
site
on
January
8th
of
this
year.
They
also
have
the
support
of
the
north
and
waterfront
residents
association
in
the
north
and
waterfront
neighborhood
council.
Thank
you.
A
I
A
I
K
B
BX
A
B
B
A
next
case
calling
VOA
seven
eight
six,
six,
two
nine
forty
Westmoreland
Street,
is
to
combine
vacant
lots
with
40
Westmoreland
for
a
total
of
fifteen
thousand
eight
hundred
twenty
three
square
feet
directly:
new
twelve
unit
residential
Berlin
with
pakhi
at
ground
level,
violations.
Article
65,
section,
eight,
a
multi-family
dwelling
is
forbidden,
article
65,
section,
nine,
the
lot
frontages
insufficient
article
65
section,
nine,
the
floaty
a
ratio
is
excessive.
Nautical
sixty
five,
six,
nine,
the
building
height,
is
excessive.
Article
65,
section
I
in
the
front
yard,
is
insufficient
in
article
65
section
nine,
the
Reyat.
D
Afternoon,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
George
Moran's,
an
attorney
with
the
business
address
at
350
West
Broadway
in
South
Boston
revised
plans
been
presented
to
the
board
depicting
a
noose
nine
unit
building
rather
than
the
original
12
unit
building.
Therefore,
obviously,
no
no
IDP
component
to
this
I
am
aware
of
the
recommendation
of
the
Boston
Planning
and
Development
Agency,
which
was
based
on
the
nine
unit
scheme
since.
D
A
D
Non-Carbon
square
in
DC,
which
I
put
on
the
record
when
the
matter
was
deferred,
it
was
Groot
with
those
CDC
cases,
the
petitioner
for
the
record
is
Thomas
Noto
again,
my
my
my
client
does,
since
this
matter
was
deferred,
went
back
with
a
couple
of
redesigns.
Most
significantly,
two
units
of
three
units
have
been
eliminated.
D
It's
now
a
nine
unit
project
and
as
late
as
past
couple
days,
there
were
additional
meetings
where,
by
the
the
continuous
massing
of
the
building
had
been
objected
to,
it
was
broken
up
so
that
it
doesn't
look
like
one
continuous
building,
which
is
reflected
on
sheet.
Eight
two
point
one:
this
is
a
consolidation
of
three
Lots.
Two
of
these
lots
are
located,
or
they
might
at
Park
address,
which
is
the
sign
of
the
building.
Essentially,
that
appears
on
the
on
the
on
the
cover
of
the
plan
sheet.
D
The
existing
two
family
building
I
believe
it
is
at
forty.
Westmoreland
obviously
has
a
Westmoreland
Street
address.
There
is
a
right-of-way
coming
down
of
Westmoreland,
which
provides
access
to
the
site.
Vehicular
access
would
be
provided
on
the
mine
at
Parkside,
hence
the
location
garage
entrance.
D
Is
there
this
was
done
so
recently
that
it's
admitted
that
the
the
the
the
blank
Arash
wall
is
an
unattractive
design,
aesthetic
in
terms
of
the
project
which
were
this
method
to
be
approved,
we
would
of
course
address
with
the
Boston
twenty
Development
Agency
in
design
review
with
respect
to
the
building
itself.
Again,
there
are
nine
units,
they
are
all
two-bedroom
units.
D
They
range
in
size
from
two
units
of
ten
thousand
sixty
five
square
feet
to
units
at
a
maximum
square,
footage
of
fourteen
hundred
and
nineteen
square
feet
and
the
rest
about
twelve
and
thirteen
hundred
square
feet.
This
is
a
2f
6000
zoning
district
tents.
There
is
a
zoning
violation
for
a
multi-family
dwelling
again.
This
is
an
almost
16,000
square.
Foot
lot
once
consolidated
the
lot
frontage,
insufficient
ciose
to
the
fact
as
I
understand
it.
That
minded
park
is
not
a
public
way.
It's
notice,
city
of
Boston
Street,
it's
a
private
way.
D
There
is
a
floor
area
ratio
violation
in
this
to
of
6,000
district.
The
maximum
FA
are
is
point
for
this
building
would
be
at
point
of
1.42.
Excuse
me
cited
for
a
building
height
violation.
That
is
stories
only
on
the
mine
at
Parkside.
This
is
a
three
storey
building
on
the
Westmoreland
Street
side.
It's
a
two-story
building.
The
district
has
a
maximum
height
limit
of
two
and
a
half
stories
in
35
feet.
This
building
Rises
no
higher
than
34
feet
in
maximum
height
there's
a
front
yard
insufficiency
in
front
yard.
D
Again
is
the
Westmoreland
Street
side.
15
feet
is
required.
The
existing
building
has
a
setback
of
1.6
feet.
This
building
would
have
a
6
foot,
front
yard
setback
on
Westmoreland
and
finally,
they
were
sited
rear
yard.
Insufficiency
30
feet
is
required
again.
This
is
the
mind
of
Parkside
six
point.
Three
feet
is
provided.
CI
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
David
Carter
from
the
mayor's
office
anywhere
services
would
like
to
go
on
record
in
support.
This
is
the
second
version
of
this
proposal.
The
initial
proposal
had
12
units.
It
was
not
received
well
by
the
community
after
a
series
of
community
meetings.
The
developer
has
brought
it
down
to
what
you
see
before
you
and
has
gotten
the
support
of
the
abutters.
Thank
you
thank.
A
B
Case
calling
POA
six
eight
three
four:
five:
zero
fifteen
Wilson
Street.
This
is
a
change
laksa
from
a
three
family
to
a
full
four
family
and
renovate
and
install
sprinklers
and
legalize
the
existing
condition.
The
violation
is
article
sixty
section
forty
Austrey
parking
is
insufficient.
Parking
is
insufficient
for
additional
unit
on
article
60
section,
eight,
the
multifamily
is
a
forbidden
in
a
three
F
6000
sub
district
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
A
A
A
A
B
Boa
seven:
eight
zero
five,
two
three
twenty-eight
briar
road:
this
is
to
construct
a
new
second
floor,
Edition
on
an
existing
footprint
of
an
existing
single-family
dwelling,
the
violations,
article
56
section,
eight,
a
floatie:
a
ratio
is
excessive
article
56
section:
eight,
the
front
yard
is
insufficient
article
56
section,
eight,
the
side
yard
is
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
Ivan.
A
BJ
A
A
A
BJ
BE
Afternoon,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board
check
Duggan
mayor's
office
and
David
services.
We
held
two
meetings
about
this
proposal.
I
was
lightly
attended.
Generally,
no
one
had
an
issue.
I
do
have
two
opposition
letters
with
me,
though,
but
for
the
most
part
from
the
other
neighbors
are
very
from
on
the
street
and
the
street
directly
behind
the
diamond
issue
and
the
neighborhood
council
voted
in
support
of
suppose
as
well.
Thank
you
now.
A
K
U
AX
K
A
Q
A
motion
for
a
pool
I'm,
actually
in
agreement
with
the
fellow
who
is
in
opposition,
but
I,
do
think
that
something
can
be
built
here
and
I'm
going
to
recommend
very
aggressive,
BIA
design,
review
and
Jeff.
The
purpose
is
to
get
it
contextually
and
whatever
has
to
be
done,
wants
to
fit
within
the
neighborhood.
This.
Q
B
This
is
adding
a
drama
to
provide
code
compliant
acts
access
to
an
existing
bonus
room,
adding
lvl
beams
to
the
first
floor,
open
rooms,
adding
a
shed-dormer
over
the
basement,
renovating
the
front
and
rear
porches
of
the
roof
deck.
The
violations,
Article
67
section
I
on
the
floor
da
ratios,
excessive
in
Article,
67,
section,
I
and
the
side
yard
is
insufficient.
They
have
an
address
for
the
record.
Please.
K
K
W
W
BG
BW
C
B
This
is
an
addition
and
alterations
to
an
existing
to
family
dwelling
at
one
dormer
and
extend
an
existing
dormer
demolished
the
rear
porch
and
build
an
addition
with
full
foundation
to
the
rear
of
the
building.
An
extend
living
space
of
the
basement
to
the
first
floor
unit
violations,
article
60,
69,
section,
nine
side,
yard
requirement
is
excessive.
Article
69
section
9,
the
height
of
success
of
two
and
a
half
stories.
Maximum
allowed
an
article
69
section
I
and
the
fluid
a
ratio
is
excessive
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
A
AG
A
A
AG
AG
Q
A
A
CA
A
A
Again,
we
will
have
to
defer
this
again
at
call
of
the
chair.
We
are
reviewing
the
memo
and
we
understand
that
it
needs
to
be
the
confidential
memo
between
the
law
department
on
the
board.
We
need
to
have
a
relook
at
it.
So
again
my
apologies,
but
we'll
have
to
defer
this
at
call
up
the
chair,
so
may
I
have
a
motion.
Please
commotion.
C
A
B
Neither
here
the
final
cases
of
the
day
of
the
recommendations
of
the
subcommittee
call
them
in
for
the
Reckitt
boa
7
8:03
to
255
McBride
Street
was
to
construct
the
site
addition
had
two
bedrooms
and
one
bathroom
kitchen.
It
was
approved.
Boa
78750,
55,
1302,
1304,
Hyde,
Park
Avenue
was
a
caters
establishment.
The
change
of
our
question
from
a
restaurant
to
caters
establishment
was
approved.
Boa
77052
for
250
310
Avenue
was
to
construct
to
shed
dormers.
It
was
approved
with
BPD
a
boa
seven.
B
Seven,
four,
seven
zero
11
print
Street
was
to
renovate
the
kitchen
existing
attic
space
and
construct
new
dorm
as
an
attic
and
extend
living
space
to
the
third
floor.
It
was
approved
with
BPD
a
case
boa
seven,
eight
five,
three
one:
six
19
BR
ad
Street
was
a
kitchen
remodel
and
closed
a
lot
existing
ports
and
accommodate
a
mudroom
and
half-bad.
It
was
approved
only
boa
seven.
Nine
four
six,
eight
three
fifteen
Gilmore
Terrace
was
to
construct
a
new
two-and-a-half
story
12
by
20
addition
to
an
existing
single-family
dwelling.