►
Description
This is a recording of the Boston Zoning Board of Appeal Subcommittee Hearing held on December 8, 2022. The Zoning Board will hold a vote on whether to approve or reject the subcommittee recommendations at its next full-Board hearing.
A
Good
evening
the
city
of
Boston
Zoning
Board
of
appeal
hearing
for
December
8
2022,
is
now
in
session.
This
hearing
has
been
being
conducted
in
accordance
with
the
applicable
provisions
of
the
open
meeting
law,
including
the
updated
Provisions
enacted
by
the
legislator
legislature
last
year.
The
new
law
allows
the
board
to
continue
its
practice
of
holding
virtual
hearings
until
March
2023.
This
hearing
of
the
board
is
being
held
remotely
via
the
zoom
webinar
event
platform.
A
This
hearing
is
also
being
recorded
in
order
to
ensure
this
hearing
of
the
board
is
open
to
the
public
members
of
the
public
May
access
this
hearing
through
telephone
and
video
conferencing.
This
information
for
connecting
to
this
hearing
is
listed
on
today's
hearing
agenda,
which
is
posted
on
the
Public
Notices
page
of
the
city's
website.
A
As
with
our
in-person
meetings,
comments
and
support
will
be
followed
by
comments
in
opposition.
The
order
of
comments
is
as
follows:
elected
officials,
representatives
of
elected
officials
and
members
of
the
public,
the
chair,
May
limit.
The
number
of
people
called
upon
to
offer
a
comment
and
the
time
for
commenting
as
time
constraints
require.
For
that
reason,
the
board
prefers
to
hear
from
members
of
the
public
who
are
most
impacted
by
a
project.
That
is
those
individuals
who
live
closest
to
the
project.
A
If
you
wish
to
comment
on
an
appeal,
please
click
the
raise
hand
button
along
the
bottom
of
your
screen
in
the
zoom
webinar
platform.
Click
it
again
and
your
hand
should
go
down.
When
the
host
sees
your
hand,
you
will
receive
a
request
to
unmute
yourself.
Select,
yes,
and
you
should
be
able
to
talk.
If
you
are
connected
to
the
hearing
by
phone,
please
press
star,
9
to
raise
and
lower
your
hand.
You
must
press
star
6
to
unmute
yourself
after
you
receive
the
request
from
the
host.
A
Those
called
upon
to
comment
will
be
asked
to
State
their
name
and
address
first
and
then
provide
their
comment,
foreign
in
the
interest
of
time,
and
to
ensure
that
you
have
enough
time
to
do
so.
Please
raise
your
hand
as
soon
as
Mr
Fortune
reads.
The
address
into
the
record:
do
not
raise
your
hand
before
the
relevant
address
is
called
or
the
meeting
host
will
not
know
to
call
on
you
at
the
appropriate
time.
These
instructions
will
be
repeated
throughout
the
hearing.
Take
a
roll
call,
Mr,
Fortune,
I'm.
B
You,
madam
chair,
the
first
order
business.
Are
there
any
deferrals
or
withdrawals
for
any
of
the
cases
tonight?
If
you
can
give
me
the
address
first,
if
you
were
deferring
or
withdrawing
37
Jenkins
Street
yes
hold
on
two
seconds.
Sorry
about
that.
D
Name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
Madam,
chair
members
of
the
board
attorney
Ryan
Spitz,
with
Adams
and
moransi,
with
the
business
address
of
168,
8th
Street,
we're
here
to
request
a
deferral
based
upon
it
has
to
be
re-advertised.
The
original
proposal
was
advertised
and
we've
made
some
substantial
changes
to
the
plans
during
the
community
process
and
unfortunately,
those
were
not
advertised
so
to
allow
the
board
to
fully
advertise
to
complete
proposal
in
front
of
us
today.
We're
asking
for
a
deferral.
The.
D
C
B
Have
a
date
of
January
19th
on
the
subcommittee
at
5
PM
great!
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Welcome!
Are
there
any
other
more?
Are
there
any
more
deferrals
or
withdrawals
for
the
five
o'clock
cases?
B
Marina
I'll
call
the
first
case
calling
VOA
one
three
one:
zero:
six,
two:
seven,
twenty
six
Sullivan
Street
this
is
to
replace
the
existing
roof
deck
a
new
stair
to
have
access
to
hatch
violation,
the
violation
that
equals
62,
section
25
through
structure
restrictions
and
article
62,
Section,
8,
side
yard,
isn't
sufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
E
F
Architecture,
yes,
Eric,
zackerson,
nine
Sackville
Street
in
Charlestown,
I'm,
the
architect.
F
Are
you
the
the
goal
is
to
replace
a
roof
deck
on
the
property
that
we
believe
it
was
probably
built
without
a
building
permit,
there
was
a
there
used
to
be
a
stair
leading
to
a
roof
hatch
or
a
ladder
leading
to
a
roof
hatch,
we're
removing
that
and
adding
a
legitimate
stare
over
the
existing
staircase
and
you
would
be
accessed
via
a
new
roof
hatch.
You
see
that
you
see
it
here
on
the
plan.
C
Plans
look
good
so
just
to
confirm
you're
setting
this
the
deck's
getting
enlarged,
obviously
a
little
bit
but
you're
sitting
five
feet
back
from
the
street.
Is
that
correct,
just
wanna
make
sure.
F
A
Right
any
testimony
in
support
or
opposition.
G
Yes,
Mr
chair
members
of
the
board,
Connor
Newman
Madam,
chair
members
of
the
board,
Conor
McGee
mayor
shops,
Neighborhood
Services,
this
time
the
mayor's
office
like
to
defer
to
the
Judgment
of
the
board
some
background
information
on
the
community
process.
The
applicant
circulate
Flyers
to
Butters
within
300
feet,
and
our
office
also
provided
plans
to
a
couple
of
abutters
upon
requests.
G
B
Madam
chair,
we
have
those
letters
and
that
the
mayor's
office
just
spoke
of.
A
A
Mr
Fortune,
yes,
Mr,
Robinson,
yes,
I,
agree
at
motion
carries.
B
From
the
next
case,
hooray
on
DOA,
one,
three,
four,
seven,
six,
nine
two,
four
thirty
five
Bunker
Hill
Street.
This
is
a
proposal
for
a
head
house,
as
well
as
one
change
in
window
location
on
ground
floor,
the
violations,
article,
62,
section,
25,
reproduction
restrictions,
proposing
head
outs,
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
foreign.
I
No
problem
hi
Joshua,
Eldridge,
homeowner
and
applicant
at
435,
Bunker
Hill
Street
in
Charlestown,
the
for
the
record.
The
change
in
window
location
was
separately
already
approved
on
another
amendment.
That
was
not
an
issue.
The
issue
here
was
a
height
restriction
for
the
proposed
head
house,
which
this
is
part
of
an
amendment
to
a
an
already
permitted
addition
to
the
third
floor.
I
That
addition
will
displace
an
existing
spiral.
Staircase
that
goes
to
the
existing
roof
deck,
and
we
are
hoping
to
replace
the
existing
that
that
displaced
spiral
staircase
with
an
internal
staircase
and
head
house
opening
up
onto
the
roof.
I
Our
preference
would
be
to
have
the
full
head
house
rather
than
the
roof
hatch
to
as
a
better
safer
access
point.
It
does
require
us
to
go
about
six
feet
over
the
maximum
Building
height
for
the
lot.
I
However,
the
head
house
is
set
back
about
22
feet,
I
think
off
I'm
ahead
from
the
front
edge
of
the
house
and
is
only
about
nine
feet
tall,
so
it
will
not
be
visible
from
the
street
and
the
neighbor.
The
neighboring.
Building
to
the
uphill
to
the
South
has
a.
It
is
a
significantly
taller
building
the
neighboring
building
to
the
north
two
neighboring
buildings
to
the
north,
both
already
have
head
houses
that
we
are
very
closely
matching
in
height
I,
think
that
covers
everything.
A
C
Yeah
I
mean
I,
think
I
mean
maybe
the
council
under
knows,
and
obviously
the
board
members
know.
You
know
it's
not
the
necessarily
the
policy
of
the
board
to
approve
head
houses,
especially
when
it
exceeds
the
height
and
the
reason
really
for
that
is
because
at
a
potential
for
obstruction
of
views
of
other
people,
which
we
don't
believe
is
necessary.
C
C
So
you
know
I,
think
I'm
more
comfortable
in
this
situation
with
a
head
house
than
we
typically
are.
So
that's.
A
Right
yeah,
thank
you.
Any
other
feedback
can
I
take
testimony.
G
Yes,
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
Conor
Newman
with
the
mayor's
office
neighborhood
services.
At
this
time,
the
mayor's
office
like
to
defer
to
the
Judgment
of
the
board
back
information
on
the
community
process.
We
had
the
applicant
to
circulate
Flyers
to
our
brothers
within
300
feet
at
this
time.
Our
office
is
not
aware
of
any
concerns
with
that
we
refer
to
the
board.
Thank
you.
A
Okay
may
I
have
a
motion.
B
C
I
agree,
Mr
secretary
I
think
that's
right,
so
I
I
will
make
a
motion
to
approve
I
hate
to
labor
this
small
project,
but
I
think
maybe
it'd
be
good
to
put
a
design
Proviso
on
this,
with
the
bpda
to
to
look
at
potentially
just
minimizing
the
amount
of
height
needed
for
the
head
house
and
just
to
sort
of
keep
it
as
low
and
clean
as
possible.
I.
C
B
You
thanks
following
your
next
case,
calling
voa-136-7350-78
Washington
Street.
This
is
demolished,
rebuild
and
expanding
existing
attached
garage
to
fit
the
family
size,
electric
vehicle
and
add
a
roof
deck
on
the
top
of
the
one-story
garage.
Also
add
a
new
wall
at
the
rare
property
line
with
an
access
gate,
the
violations,
article
62,
section
62-8,
the
ray
odds
insufficient
and
article
62,
Section
8.
The
side
yard
is
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
J
E
J
Property
is
78
Washington
streets
located
in
the
Charlestown
neighborhood
zoning
district
and
the
3F
2000
sub
District.
The
Hamels
occupy
the
properties
of
primary
residents,
along
with
their
three
children.
They
have
a
fourth
child
on
the
way,
literally
any
day
or
moment.
Now
this
is
a
single
family
attached,
Rose
house
style
residence
located
on
the
southwesterly
side
of
Washington
Street,
the
rear
of
the
property
has
access
to
Lynn
Street
and
is
improved
with
a
small
garage
on
the
southwest
corner
of
the
lot.
J
So
all
of
the
relief
here
relates
to
the
rear
and
side
yards,
and
it's
worth
noting
that
both
citations
relate
to
pre-existing
non-conformities.
The
proposed
garage
replaces
a
pre-existing
non-conforming
garage
which
was
built
on
the
lot
line,
leaving
no
rear
yard
and
little
to
no
side
yard
to
the
west
of
the
garage.
The
the
proposed
garage
would
not
increase
that
non-conformity
and
it
would
greatly
improve
the
Aesthetics
of
the
property
by
replacing
an
existing
wooden
structure
with
an
updated
and
improved
garage.
J
Current
garages
run
down.
They
they're
really
looking
to
utilize
this
as
a
usable
space
with
modern
usage
with
an
electrical
vehicle
that
will
adequately
allow
for
for
for
this
family
of
four
family
of
six
or
soon
to
be
family
of
six.
J
It's
also
an
appropriate
use,
given
the
scarcity
of
on
street
parking
lacks
a
lack
of
on-street
electric
vehicle
charging
stations
in
the
immediate
vicinity
of
the
project.
It's
in
harmony
with
the
neighborhood
with
the
street.
There
are
several
properties
on
this
strip
of
Washington
Street
that
have
buttland
that
have
either
structures
or
garages
into
the
rear
inside
lot
lines
again.
This
is
no
increase
to
the
non-conformity
and
with
the
character
of
the
neighborhood,
we
have
been
in
touch
with
ons
on
this
project.
J
A
Thank
you
may
I
ask
regarding
the
roof
deck.
Are
there
other
Butters
who
have
a
similar
roof
deck
above
their
garages.
J
A
And
the
roof
deck
extends
similar,
so
that
has
a
similar
non-conforming.
You
know
rare
yard,
insufficient
Etc,
the
similar
articles,
in
violation.
J
B
J
The
the
sight
lines
that
are
created
in
a
reduction
of
the
roof
actually
improve
visibility,
because
you're
you're
taking
down
a
part,
a
part
of
the
roof
line
which
has
now
been
you
know
flat
due
to
due
to
the
roof
deck.
But
again
the
the
roof.
Deck
is
not
subject
to
the
appeal.
C
Plans
are
good,
you
know
I,
it's
certainly
an
upgrade
to
what's
there
and
I,
it
seems
to
be
following
roughly
the
size
of
what's
there
now
when
I
I,
don't
disagree
with
the
attorney
on
the
sort
of
it's
not
the
full
length
with
a
pitched
roof,
so
it
actually
might
feel
a
little
bit
less
large.
C
You
know
I
think
it's
in
a
fairly
prominent
spot,
so
I
would
say.
If
we
we
proceed
with
this,
we
should
have
it
go
through
the
bpda
design
review
just
for
consistency,
and
there
is,
it
looks
like
the
property
to
the
right
from
the
rear
at
76.
Maybe
yeah
I'm,
not
sure
exactly
what
the
addresses
are
but
looks
like
it
has
a
very
similar
condition
in
terms
of
with
a
flat
deck
roof
with
a
garage
next
door.
C
So
I
think
it's
it's
it's
it's
a
it's
a
fair
sort
of
revision,
an
update
to
what's
there
now
and
certainly
I,
think
it'll
look
better
and
with
the
service
of
the
exterior
deck
I
think
it's
where
it
seems
to
work
pretty
well
with
the
layout
of
the
house.
So
no
real
questions
for
me
on
that.
G
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
Conor
Newman
with
the
mayor's
office
and
neighborhood
services.
At
this
time,
the
mayor's
office
like
to
defer
to
the
Judgment
of
the
board
some
background
information
on
the
community
process.
We
had
the
butter
excuse
me.
We
had
the
proponents,
circulate
Flyers
to
a
Butters
within
300
feet
of
the
property
and
upon
requests.
Neighborhood
Services
forwarded
the
plants
to
a
number
of
of
those
at
Butters.
G
We
did
get
one
letter
of
opposition
regarding
concerns
about
loss
of
sight,
with
the
garage
being
slightly
enlarged
and
some
concerns
about
privacy
with
the
roof
deck.
But
beyond
that,
we
did
not
hear
from
any
other
residents
that
we
refer
to
me.
Thank
you,
madam.
B
G
The
one
that
we
forwarded
to
was
that
was
a
direct
letter,
I
believe.
Judging
from
the
address
Okay.
C
B
Yeah
one
is
one,
is
a
directed
butter.
C
C
I
I
I
think
I
think
it's
it's
an
improvement
of
over
what's
there
and
you
know,
I
think
that
I
guess
I'll
I'll
make
a
motion
to
approve
with
BPA
design,
review
and
I.
Guess.
I
would
just
ask
that
your
butter,
hopefully
or
the
name
proponent,
can
work
with
their
neighbors
just
to
make
sure
any
of
their
concerns
are
addressed
as
best
as
possible
during
the
process.
So
I'll.
B
C
B
Calling
your
next
case
calling
voa138
-5031
101
to
109
State
Street.
This
is
the
remove.
The
Proviso
from
the
previous
owner
continue
to
have
takeout
that
need
to
Grant
the
new
Proviso
to
the
new
owner,
the
violations,
article
6
section
4
other
protectional
conditions
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
foreign.
H
M
Can
you
hear
me
yes,
good
evening,
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board?
My
name
is
Emily
udem,
sup
and
I'm,
the
owner
on
107,
State
Street,
and
it's
a
bubble,
tea
shop
and
I
would
wish
to
take
out
granted
to
like
the
cafe,
as
as
it
has
been.
You
know
granted
to
restaurants
that
happen
in
that
location
before
it's
crucial
to
my
business,
the
bubble
tea
shop,
to
have
the
drinks
be
able
to
be
taken
out
and
to
ensure
that
the
customer
experience
is
what
you
expect.
A
C
Not
really
I,
guess,
probably
only
if
there's
any
I
assume
you're
going
to
do
some
exterior
signage
upgrades
or
changes
which
will
have
to
go
through
a
different,
permitting
process
for
the
city.
Yeah
I,
don't
see
any
no
issues
with
me
on
this
one,
no
straightforward
all.
C
G
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
Connor
Newman
with
the
mayor's
office
neighborhood
services.
At
this
time
the
mayor's
office
like
to
defer
to
the
Judgment
the
board
some
back
background
information
on
the
community
process.
We
had
the
applicant
circulate
Flyers
to
a
Butters
within
300
feet.
We
did
not
hear
any
concerns.
They
also
went
on
to
meet
with
the
wharf
District
Council
and
received
a
letter
of
support
from
that
with
that
we'd
refer
to
the
Judgment
of
the
board.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
may
I
have
a
motion.
C
Make
a
motion
to
approve
with
the
typical
takeout
language,
and
also
for
this
applicant.
Only
I'll.
B
C
B
N
N
The
the
owners
are
looking
to
construct
a
bedroom
for
one
of
their
daughters
to
increase
their
right
now,
she's
in
a
very
small
space.
N
The
existing
attic
is
partially
finished,
we're
looking
to
increase
it
slightly
by
adding
a
dormer
on
the
back
and
also
putting
in
a
Stairway
that's
much
safer
than
the
existing
stairway,
the
either
building
on
each
site,
we're
in
h.265
District
and
we're
looking
to
expand
the
far
from
the
existing
2.8
to
2.9
the
buildings
on
either.
N
Side
of
us
are
a
good
story
higher
and
also
well
over
three
with
their
far
the
the
bedroom
you
see
here
and
the
attic
proposed
plan
with
a
bathroom
there's
existing
Plumbing
up
there
that
we
will
be
utilizing
and
this
additional
space
is,
is
highly
valuable
to
the
owners
and
so
their
daughter.
N
You
can
see
she's
in
that
small
room
on
the
fourth
floor,
now
that
where
the
stairway
would
go
so
she
would
have
a
much
nicer
room
and
we
did
have
a
thorough
Community
process
with
this
project
and
reached
out
to
all
the
neighbors
I've
submitted
letters
of
support
from
both
the
butters
or
anyone's
behind
us
as
well.
C
A
All
right,
thank
you,
may
I
take
testimony.
G
Yes,
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
Conor
Newman
with
the
mayor's
office
neighborhood
services.
At
this
time,
the
mayor's
office
like
to
defer
to
the
Judgment
of
the
board
some
background
information
on
the
community
process.
We
held
a
meeting,
no
questions
or
concerns
were
raised
from
the
butters
they
went
on
to
meet
with
the
Beacon
Hill
civic
association.
There
were
some
initial
concerns
regarding
the
increase
of
far
but
ultimately,
the
bhca
voted
to
go
in
non-opposition
to
this
proposal.
With
that
we
defer
to
the
Judgment
the
board.
Thank
you
thank.
B
C
I'll
I'll
make
a
motion
to
to
approve.
B
The
next
case
calling
boa
132-3055
887
Dorchester
Avenue.
This
is
a
replacement
of
storefront
windows
and
door.
A
change
from
a
commercial
garage
to
eyelash,
makeup
studio
front
store
will
be
a
replacement
of
an
existing
garage
at
the
front.
The
violation,
article
65
Section,
8
beauty,
shop,
eyelash,
makeup,
studios,
conditional
name.
B
Following
the
next
case,
calling
boa
one
three:
nine
zero,
four,
four
nine
seven
Zamora
Court.
This
is
built
an
additional
living
space
in
the
Attic
expanded
their
existing
upper
unit.
Additional
dwelling
unit
to
be
added
in
the
basement.
The
violation
is
article
10,
section,
one
limitation
of
parking
area.
Article
55,
section
9
of
number
of
allowed
habitable
stories,
has
been
exceeded.
Article
55
section
9
accessory
fpr
article
55,
section,
9,
insufficient
side,
job
setback,
fanatical
55,
section
65-41
off
street
parking
is
insufficient.
The
design
and
tandem
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
O
Good
evening
Madam
chair
board
members,
my
name
is
Gerald
otler
address
seven
Zamora
Court,
just
a
point
of
clarification.
We
had
originally
filed
an
application
to
both
expand
living
space
into
the
attic
and
add
a
another
unit
in
the
basement
because
of
the
code
and
Zoning
challenges
of
the
basement
unit
that
was
removed
from
the
permit
application.
So
that
is
not
currently
under
consideration.
O
What
we
have
before
use
I'll
describe
briefly
and
share
my
screen,
my
wife
and
I
own,
a
two
family
sevens
or
more
Court
in
Jamaica
Plain,
my
mother
lives.
In
the
unit
downstairs.
We
live
upstairs
with
our
two
children.
Would
you
like
me
to
present,
or
is
it
easier?
If
you
do
it,
you
can
go
to
page
seven
to
show
the
existing
condition
of
unit
two
where
we
live,
and
so
we
have
a
three
bedroom.
Two
bath
unit.
O
We've
lived
in
this
home
for
seven
years
at
this
point,
made
some
significant
interior
and
exterior
improvements,
and-
and
at
this
point
in
time,
with
our
two
kids
getting
older
and
also
with
me,
working
at
home
full-time,
which
was
not
something
that
most
of
us
would
have
envisioned.
Just
a
few
years
ago,
we're
finding
that
we
would
like
some
additional
space
so
we're
proposing
a
expansion
up
into
the
attic
actually
scroll
through.
O
If
you
don't
mind,
you
can
just
see
the
existing
attic
condition
on
the
next
and
the
existing
roof
by
the
way.
My
architect,
Brian
melaton,
is
here
as
well
to
answer
any
questions
and
then,
if
you
keep
scrolling,
you
will
see
the
the
existing
the
South
elevation,
essentially
the
front
followed
by
the
west
elevation,
North
and
East,
and
then
on
the
following
slide.
You
can
see
what
we're
proposing
we
would
lose
a
if
you
go
to
the
floor
plan.
Please
you
will.
O
We
would
lose
one
more
I
believe
yeah.
We
would
lose
that
middle
bedroom.
Where
you
see
the
new
staircase,
we
need
a
new
code,
complaint,
staircase
and
other
than
that.
The
the
floor
plan
that
are
existing
unit
would
remain
unchanged.
If
you
go
to
the
next
slide,
you'll
see
the
proposed
floor
plan
in
the
currently
unfinished
attic
space,
a
study
area
in
front,
a
larger
bedroom,
a
smaller
bedroom
and
a
full
bath.
So
it's
a
net
gain
of
one
additional
bedroom
and
one
bathroom.
O
O
Sorry
if
you
scroll
just
to
the
next
slides
you'll,
see
the
the
Dormer
here
in
plan
View
and
then
the
next
slide
shows
the
South
elevation
with
that
Dormer
added.
And
then,
if
you
go
to
the
following
slide,
you'll
see
the
west
elevation
and
you
can
see
that
we've,
you
know
kept
it.
We
think
modest
in
scale
compared
to
the
the
length
of
the
roof
in
order
to
minimize
the
and
the
visual
impact.
We're
happy
to
you
know
continue
to
to
work
with
bpda
on
on
design.
O
If
there
are
additional
design
moves,
we
can
change
with
that
happy
to
take
any
questions
or
Brian.
Did
you
have
anything
to
add
to
to
my
presentation.
P
I
would
just
like
to
clarify
that
we're
proposing
two
shed
Dormers
and
I
believe
there's
one's
one
side,
setback,
violation
related
to
the
Dormers
and.
H
C
C
I
think
this
is
a
fairly
straightforward
and
and
I
think
typical
way
to
kind
of
expand
into
these
addicts
when
you
need
code
related
clearances.
So
honestly,
I
really
don't
have
any
questions.
It's
pretty
straightforward.
We
see
this
a
lot
so
I
think
and
it's
an
owner
occupied
building,
so
I
think
it
makes
a
lot
of
sense.
So
no
questions
from
me.
A
Thank
you
may
I
take
testimony.
Is
there
anyone
to
speak
in
support
or
opposition
hi.
Q
Yes,
good
evening,
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board
Tiffany
Carrero
here
from
the
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood
Services.
This
applicant
has
undergone
an
extensive
Community
process.
Our
office
facilitated
in
a
Butters
meeting
back
on
Monday
July
25th
of
this
year
2022
they
managed
to
receive
letters
of
support
from
both
the
jpa
and
the
Jamaica
Pond
Association,
as
well
as
the
Jamaica
Plain
neighborhood
Town
School.
At
this
time,
the
mayor's
office
would
like
to
go
on
record
into
version
of
judgment.
Thank
you.
M
E
R
R
I
represent
Marianne
Doherty,
she's,
the
owner
and
and
Resident
at
11
tomorrow,
which
is
on
the
west
side.
It's
a
budding
property
in
the
west
side.
The
two
properties
share
a
common
driveway
and
have
reciprocal
easements
over
that
driveway.
R
What
where
the
first
point
of
contention
is
that
it's
just
too
big
for
this
already
dense
neighborhood
you're,
increasing
the
non-conformity
of
the
floor
area
ratio
to
by
34,
so
you're
going
it's
going
from
18
above,
which
is
to
52
above
and
even
if
you
keep
the
Baseline
of
what
non-conformity
is
today
at
0.71
in
a
0.6
allowable
and
they
are
you're,
increasing
it
by
28.
So
we're
it's
a
it's
significant,
it's
above
what's
allowed
in
section
9-1
and
the
owners
intend
on
asking
for
even
more.
R
That
is
the
third
unit.
I
know
that's
not
not
at
issue
at
this
time,
but
again
it's
it's
part
of
the
plan
specific
to
11
Zamora.
We
There's
issues
of
light
and
there's
issues
of
privacy
and
now
you're
changing
a
2.5
story,
building
into
a
three
story
building
which
now
has
views
down
into
the
two
units:
next
door.
R
You
also,
you
also
are
going
to
be
blocking
some
light
from
one
of
the
only
two
sides
of
the
property
that
actually
get
direct
sunlight,
that
the
south
facing
front
side
and
the
side
facing
this
is
that
seventh
more
on
the
other
side,
there
are
two
triple
Deckers
that
are
pretty
close.
I
I
did
in
the
file
I
put
in
a
number
of
pictures.
I,
don't
know
if.
L
A
C
Yes,
I
will
make
it
I'll
make
a
motion
to
approve
I.
Think
that
I
understand
the
concerns
of
the
abutters,
but
I
feel
like
in
a
home
owner
occupied
residence
for
a
family
and
not
all
far
increases
are
created.
Equal
and
I
think
that
this
is
a
common
addition
to
a
lot
of
residents
to
utilize
an
additional
space
for
a
living
and
I.
Think
it's
an
appropriate
proposal.
B
C
A
Robinson,
yes,
I
too
vote
Yes
motion
carries.
B
S
M
S
Looking
at
286
Blue,
Hill
Ave
in
Milton
and
I
am
the
residential
designer
representing
the
owner,
nickyness
Beth,
65
Mount
Hope
Street
is
her
primary
residence
and
she's
been
living
here
for
the
past
16
years,
and
the
intention
here
is
to
propose
an
extension
of
living
space
of
this
existing
single-family
home
by
building
an
addition
on
the
left
and
the
rear
side
of
the
existing
house
of
approximately
one
thousand
square
feet
at
the
Garden
level
and
also
an
additional
1000
square
feet.
S
On
the
first
floor,
the
violation
side
is
where
front
yard
insufficient
and
rear
yard
insufficient
the
front
yard.
The
regulation
calls
for
20.
The
existence
is
15
feet
and
what
we're
proposing
is
to
maintain
the
the
same
15
feet.
The
addition
is
on
the
left
side
based
on,
as
you
can
see,
in
the
key
plan
and
then
on
the
rear.
The
regulation
calls
for
40.
S
the
existing
is
it's
30
feet
and
we
are
proposing
15
feet
to
extend
towards
the
back
I'm
open
to
any
questions.
Now,
if
you
have.
S
The
other,
that's
basically
this,
where
the
habitable
square
footage
being
added
a
thousand
square
feet
in
the
perimeter
per
floor,.
C
Plans
are
good
one
question
I
just
had
on
the
rear
of
butter,
so
you're
it's
a
corner
lot.
Is
that
correct,
correct,
yeah,
okay
and
so
the
rear
of
butter
they
face,
obviously
the
side
yard
or
the
side
street,
or
the
The
Edge
Street.
Okay,.
C
I
I
I,
don't
have
I,
think
I,
don't
have
any
questions
regarding
the
proposal.
I
think
it's
it's
I
understand.
I
mean
this
is
a
single
family
and
it's
staying
a
single
family.
Is
that
correct
all.
C
And
you
said
it's
owner
occupied
correct,
correct,
okay,
great
I,
I,
don't
have
any
other
additional
questions.
I
think
probably
be
good
to
have
the
BPA
design
review
on
this.
If
we
approve
just
since
I,
think
it's
it's
a
fairly
large
change
to
the
house
into
the
neighborhood,
but
I
think
it
seems
to
be
somewhat
appropriate
for
the
the
corner
condition
and
the
lot.
So
no
other
questions
for
me.
Thank.
A
You
it
also
looks
like
they
have
camouflage
in
their
ear,
so
yeah
they
have
Landscaping.
Is
there
anyone
here
to
speak
in
support
or
opposition.
H
B
Secretary
here
we
do
have
a
couple
of
letters
of
support.
I
do
have
a
quick
question,
though
I'm
looking
on
Google
Maps
for
the
applicant,
so
there's
a
fence,
a
chain
link
fence
and
then
there's
a
stockade
fence.
Is
that
your
property
line
at
the
chain
link
or
is
it
the
property
at
the
Stockade.
B
On
Brad
street
on
Bradstreet,
which
is
the
side
street
that
Mr
Robinson
said
there
is
a
chain-link
fence
and
then
there
is
a
stockade
fence
and
they
I
would
look
I'm
looking
at.
Maybe
the
six
foot
between
the
chain
link
and
The
Stockade
Fence
is.
S
S
B
B
C
Let
me
try
to
well
the
stock.
It
looks
like
someone
installed
The
Stockade
on
the
inside,
so
it
looks
nicer
and
the
chain
link
on
the
is
this
actual
fence,
but.
S
L
B
B
B
Following
the
next
case,
calling
boa
one
three,
eight
three
seven,
four
two
Twenty
Eight
Taunton
Avenue.
This
is
to
extend
the
house
in
the
back
and
violations.
Article
69,
section
9.
The
law
degree
is
insufficient.
Article
6969,
the
full
day
ratio
is
excessive:
article
69,
section
9,
the
side
yards
and
sufficient
and
article
69
section
9.
The
real
yard
is
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
records.
Please.
L
Evening,
everyone,
my
name,
is
Vladimir
I'm,
the
contractor
representing
the
homeowner.
The
the
addition
is
going
to
be
basic
to
extend
the
house
in
the
in
the
back.
The
first
floor
will
be
around
30
336
square
feet.
L
C
Robinson,
my
only
question
is
so
you
there's
an
existing
deck
back
there,
that's
correct
yes
and
then
the
addition
are
you
is
that
is
that
an
elevated
deck
I
can't
quite
see
it
on
are.
L
C
L
C
Okay,
honestly,
no
questions,
it's
I
think
it's
pretty
straightforward
as
well,
so.
G
Chair
members
of
the
board,
Connor
Newman
with
the
mayor's
office
Neighborhood
Services
for
free
to
at
this
time.
Our
mayor's
office
would
like
to
defer
judgment
to
the
board
some
backer
information,
the
community
process.
We
had
the
applicant
notify
a
Butters
and
they
also
attended
the
Roseberry
Ruskin
Dale
Road
neighborhood
association,
October
11th.
We
had
the
abutors
meeting.
October
14th
for
several
of
letters
were
in
support
of
the
project,
one
about
her,
who
did
not
do
not
want
to
make
sure
that
the
company
doing
the
construction
was
mindful
of
neighbors.
G
No
letters
of
opposition
were
received
at
this
we'd
like
to
defer
judgment
to
the
board.
Thank
you.
A
All
right,
thank
you,
may
I
have
a
motion.
C
B
B
B
Calling
the
next
case
calling
boa
139
4506
20,
hazelmere
Road,
just
in
addition,
Make
Way
for
new
kitchen,
bathroom
bedroom
and
sun
room,
the
violations,
article
67,
section,
9,
the
side
yards
insufficient
and
article
67,
section
9.
The
rail
yard
is
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
T
T
They
have
been
living
in
this
home
for
30
years
now
and
they
would
like
to
age
in
place
here.
Anaya
is
having
issues
getting
up
the
stairs,
so
we
really
want
to
make
the
first
floor
just
in
a
living
area
for
her
and
her
husband
as
they
about
the
rest
of
their
days
in
the
house.
T
T
The
rear
yard
will
have
23.2
feet,
whereas
the
zoning
is
40
feet
behind
this
house.
There
is
actually
a
huge
retaining
wall
way
back
there
and
and
a
condo
development.
T
C
No,
this
is
this
seems
very
straightforward,
and
as
long
as
as
long
as
none
of
the
nobody's
upset
about
it,
I
think
it
looks
really
straightforward
and
a
nice
addition.
No
issues
for
me
on
this.
So.
U
Chair
of
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
the
mayor's
office.
I
hosted
a
meeting
for
65
Mount
Hope
Street
on
we're.
U
U
A
C
I'll
make
a
motion
for
approval.
B
B
Following
the
next
case
would
be
discussion
call
in
case
boa
one,
two,
six,
five,
one:
five,
two
ten
Carson
Street.
This
is
a
paver
stone
driveway,
which
can
park
two
vehicles,
a
pave
drivers
in
the
front
of
the
house.
You
can
let
the
outside
car
move
easier
inside
Cod
needs
to
come
out.
This
paved
driveway
is
not
for
parking
purposes.
The
violations,
article
65
section,
41,
Osprey
parking
and
loading
article
65,
section
9,
the
front
yard's
insufficient
and
article
65,
section
9.
The
side
yard
is
insufficient
and
even
address
for
the
record.
Please.
V
Hi,
can
you
hear
me
hello,
hello,.
B
V
Sure
so
my
name
is
kahei,
and
this
is
a
is
a
single
family
house
and
it's
owner
occupied
and
we
want
to
do
the
driveway
in
the
front
or
I
would
say
side
yard
and
then
So
based
on
the
neighborhood
meeting
last
time,
and
we
did
some
changes
on
it
and
this
plan
is
the
new
one
and
to
solve
the
saiya
institution
problem.
We
decrease
the
product
transport.
We
want
from
three
to
two
so
that
there
will
be
more
spaces
left
and
The.
V
Parking
Spot
will
end
at
the
stairs
that
that
you
can
see
on
the
clock
plan
and
then,
secondly,
we
decided
to
keep
the
triangle
shape
down,
on
the
left
hand,
side
of
the
front
yard
so
that
the
green
area,
insufficient
problem
can
be
solved
too.
And
third,
we
also
decided
to
change
the
paid
material
from
asphalt
to
table
Stone.
So
since
there
there
are,
some
neighbors
pointed
out
that
the
water
flows,
Direction
can
cause
a
problem
and
that's
why
we
decided
to
change
the
material
to
paver,
stone.
C
Yeah
I
mean
I
I,
probably.
B
C
B
The
record
in
regards
to
10
Carson
Street
has
a
vehicle
in
the
front
yard
and
located
at
the
corner.
Therefore,
he
would
like
to
request
that
this
proposal
be
reduced
to
one
vehicle,
yeah
and
I'm.
Looking
at
it
on
Google
Maps,
it's
actually
a
corner,
but
it's
not
a
corner
lot.
The
street
goes
yeah
I.
A
C
V
Place
we
did,
we
did
cut
the
stairs
doing
the
renovated
in
June
20
21st,
so
the
the
photo
on
the
Google
Map
was
the
old
one.
It's.
C
The
old
one!
So
if
you
reduce
the
width
of
the
driveway,
because
a
parking
spot
is
only
nine
foot,
maybe
nine
foot,
six
nine
foot
by
20
feet
required
for
parking.
It
seems
like
if
you
skinny
down
the
driveway
to
10
feet
or
a
little
bit
less.
You
could
actually
get
the
car
around
that
railing
and
then
Park,
so
you're,
not
even
encroaching
on
the
front
yard
at
all.
Is
that
something
that
you
considered.
C
Next
to
your
Landing,
so
it
would
kind
of
go
next
to
the
first
stair
Landing
up
for
past.
The
stairs
so
like
in
this
condition
of
a
car
is
parked.
You
can't
get
to
the
stairs
because
you
won't
be
able
to
get
by
it
on
the
corner
of
the
house.
If
you
move
the
car
back
into
the
backyard
further,
then
you
could
actually
get
into
the
stairs.
V
Yeah
but
well,
the
green
area
be
a
problem.
Yes,.
C
C
I,
don't
have
a
problem
with
that,
because
I
think
I
I
think
there's
a
solution
here,
but
I'm
just
not
sure
it's
this
one
I
fear
the
full
board
will
just
deny
it,
because
this
is
not
what
we're
approving
but
I'm
happy
to
defer
it
to
the
full
board.
So.
B
V
Because
I
I
try
it
once
when
the
stair
wasn't
cut,
but
I
think
I
hit
a
little
bit,
but
it
might
be
my
sorry
thing
that
technical,
it's
not
good
yeah
yeah.
C
Feasible
so
right,
I
I'll
make
a
motion
to
defer
to
the
full
board.
B
A
Mr
Robinson,
yes,
I
too
vote
Yes
motion
carries.
Are
we
going
back
to
88
in
Dorchester
Ave,
so.
B
We
can
go
to
the
13th.
That
would
be.
We
can
do
it
next
week.
We
can
put
on
the
agenda
for
next
week.
B
V
Okay,
what
time
would
it
be.