►
From YouTube: Zoning Board of Appeal Hearing 10-30-2018
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.
B
A
C
D
A
D
A
D
D
E
Thanks
for
hearing
us
this
morning
for
the
record,
my
name
is
Adam
Hundley
from
cool
student
stores
and
real
estate
counsel
for
the
applicant
and
on
my
right
is
Harold
Dennis
from
the
Druker
company,
which
is
the
applicant
just
in
30
seconds,
we'd
appreciate
it.
If
the
board
would
consider
granting
some
additional
time
to
get
the
350
Boylston
Street
project
underway
in
this
effort
are
absolutely
continuing
to
start
the
project,
including
inquiries
from
prospective
tenants,
outreach
to
prospective
tenants.
E
E
A
D
F
2015
to
renovate
and
change
the
occupancy
of
an
existing
single-family
dwelling
to
a
3
family.
Knowing
this
matter
was
extended
by
the
board
on
November
14th
of
2017,
it
is
set
to
expire,
November,
13th
2018,
my
client
is
near
permit
issuance
permit
issuance
is
actually
imminent.
The
last
thing-
and
he
had
to
do-
is
to
sign
a
contract
with
his
contractor.
Department
may,
in
fact
the
issuing
today
or
tomorrow,
but
I
don't
want
to
take
the
risk
that
it
may
expire.
I
therefore
request
a
six-month
extension
I.
A
D
D
This
is
replaced
a
patio
train
to
prevent
water
back
up
into
the
home,
remove
patio
block
and
dig
down
to
the
exposed
to
drain.
This
is
a
new
46
inch
high
block
retaining
wall
and
paver
stones
to
be
installed
by
our
violations.
Article
32,
section
4.
This
is
G
code
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
Susan.
A
G
A
G
So
we
hired
a
civil
engineer,
Doyle
engineering,
to
inspect
the
G
Cod
issue
and
he
submitted
plans
in
Boston
water
sewer,
commission
and
they
have,
since
they
reviewed
it
within
a
week,
which
is
very
quick
and
they
just
had
two
comments
regarding
existing
sewer
and
rain
leader
locations,
which
my
civil
engineer
submitted
yesterday.
So
we
don't
have
final
approval,
but
it's
already
been
reviewed
and
the
comments
submitted
good.
H
A
I
D
D
This
is
section
seven
or
five
point:
five
fire
resistant
rating,
the
fire
resistant,
rated
and
accordance
with
table
601
and
602
of
this
section.
The
required
fire
resistant
rating
of
exterior
walls
with
a
fire
separation.
Distance
of
greater
than
ten
feet
shall
be
rated
for
expose
it
to
to
fire
from
the
inside
the
required
fire
resistance
rating
of
exterior
walls
with
a
fire
separation.
Distance
of
less
or
equal
to
ten
feet
shall
be
rated
for
exposure
to
the
fire
from
both
sides.
D
K
Morning,
mr.
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
left,
is
Nestor
Lemus
who's
the
project
manager
on
this
project.
Briefly,
this
overall
project
was
approved
by
the
board
for
zoning
for
conversion
and
renovation
of
an
existing
four-story,
brick
building
in
East
Boston.
It
was
approved
for
its
zoning
relief
back
in
October
of
2017
to
convert
the
use
and
occupancy
from
ground-floor
retail
drycleaner
and
the
top
three
floors
of
office
use
to
be
maintained.
K
The
retail
dry
cleaner
on
the
ground
floor,
but
changed
those
upper
three
floors
to
a
residential
use,
so
the
project
was
approved
for
zoning
back
about
a
year
ago.
The
plans
at
that
time
are
not
fully
developed
in
terms
of
building
code
relief,
fire
separations,
so
we're
back
in
front
of
the
board
today
for
building
code
relief
and
what
work
was
required
is
due
to
the
fire
resistance
ratings
and
the
change
from
that
office
to
the
residential
use.
K
What
we're
proposing
is
an
alternative
compliance
method
because
the
buildings
are
situated
too
close
together
under
the
building
code.
What
we're,
alternatively,
proposing,
because
this
is
an
existing
brick
building-
that's
been
there
for
many
years
to
move
the
line
over
I
think
we're
off
by
about
two
inches
to
move
the
line
over
two
inches.
The
building
over
two
inches
to
comply
is
just
not
feasible
to
literally
comply
with
the
building
code.
So
what
we're
proposing
is
to
add
extra
sprinkler
units
over
each
one
of
those
windows
facing
the
side
of
the
subject.
K
Building
that's
too
close
to
the
abutting
building
in
that
sprinkler
system,
which
is
on
the
plans,
was
designed
in
a
way
in
the
consideration
for
the
specific
purpose,
these
mitigating
factors,
we
would
suggest
again
an
existing,
very
thick
brick
building
located.
You
know
only
two
inches
off
from
compliance,
helped
to
show
that
we
can
comply
with
the
building
code
and
in
a
much
more
feasible
manner,
cost-efficient
and
still
achieve
the
same
result
and
so
Lynette.
Yes,
my
understanding
is.
We
had
Covenant
fire
protection,
mr.
Jason
Kay
and
was
a
licensed
fired
up
a
Texan
engineer.
A
J
Had
a
chance
to
review
the
plans,
I
will
make
one
suggestion
to
the
plans
is
that
working
with
mr.
Pazhani,
we
probably
believe
that
they
should
have
a
sprinkler
outside
the
window
between
the
two
buildings,
in
addition
to
the
inside
the
window
over
the
window,
and
we
would
love
that
letter
from
the
cold
consultant,
because
what
was
what
was
his
response?
His.
L
Response
and
speaking
with
the
ISD
plan,
reviewers
specifically
mr.
Santana,
was
to
put
a
fire
sprinkler
suppression
system
underneath
the
window
directly,
because
it's
a
three
actually
four
course:
layered
brick
wall,
it's
a
type,
three
B
construction,
so
he
suggested
put
it
right
underneath
the
window
which
would
comply,
giving
everyone
fire
protection
over
correct,
overdoing
that,
yes,
on
the
inside
of
the
outside
on.
J
A
J
So
they're
inside
the
window
over
each
bedroom
window,
as
you
can
see
when
they
come
down
in
bedroom
one
and
in
unit
in
unit
seven
in
the
bedroom
bedroom
one
in
unit
six
we're
what
I'm
proposing
is
an
additional
sprinkler
outside
so
con.
So
you
have
options
here.
You
can
defer
to
find
out
if
that
works,
or
we
can
vote
on
it
today.
I
would
say.
K
A
J
D
By
thank
you
very
much
building
code
calling
VOA,
eight
five,
six,
five,
seven,
zero
155
Warren
Avenue-
this
is
section
77
80
cm
are
one
thousand
nine
point.
One
three
stay
away:
stay
away:
stay
roof;
one:
zero,
zero,
nine
point,
one
three
Gateway
to
roof
in
building
four
or
more
stories
above
great
plane.
D
One
stay
away
shall
extend
to
the
roof
surface
unless
the
roof
has
a
slope
steeper
than
four
units
vertical
in
twelve
units
or
Zone
Corazon
ttle,
one,
zero,
zero,
nine
point,
one
three
point:
one:
the
roof:
access
where
stairway
is
provided
to
a
roof
access
to
shop;
Weaver,
fried
it
through
a
fence
house
complying
with
this
section,
one:
five:
zero.
Nine
point:
two
we
haven't
addressed
on
the
record.
M
M
Phase
of
Sharif-
and
she
is,
she
had
us-
meet
with
the
Ellis
Neighborhood
Association
in
the
Parks
and
Rec
Department
to
get
their
input
and
he
was
pretty
much
unanimous.
They
would.
Everyone
would
prefer
for
aesthetic
reasons
that
we
now
put
up
a
head
house,
but
we
put
up
a
roof
hatch
instead
and
that's
what
I'm
seeking
the
variance?
M
N
Good
morning,
chairman
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
face
a
Sharif
with
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services.
While
we
normally
don't
speak
on
building
code
relief,
I
do
one
acknowledge
that
we
did
hold
an
abutters
meeting
in
this
case
because
it
is
regarding
a
roof
deck.
That's
going
above
this
house-
and
it
is
true
best
majority
of
the
neighbors-
did
prefer
a
hatch
over
a
head
house
due
to
the
impact
on
their
views
and
also
just
the
way
that
it
looks
in
a
landmark
district.
Thank
you.
J
A
A
A
I
D
Callin
for
the
record
calling
Bo
a
five
seven:
five:
seven:
zero
zero,
sixty
five
to
seventy
three
East
Cottage
Street,
the
rock
companion
cases
vo
a
five;
seven;
five:
seven:
zero
to
sixty
seven.
He
squatted
Street
Bo
a
six
one:
six,
nine,
eight,
zero,
nine
to
eleven
Hillsborough
Street,
boa
six;
one:
seven:
zero
one;
seven;
thirteen
to
fifteen
red
Hillsborough
Street
in
boa
six;
one:
seven
I'm!
Sorry,
boa
six,
one:
seven:
zero:
three:
zero!
Twenty
one
to
twenty
three
react:
Hillsborough
and
boa
six:
one:
six:
nine,
seven,
seven!
A
O
D
I
P
Q
A
C
D
C
D
Call
the
next
three
cases
calling
VOA
eight
six
one,
six
thirty
nine
ninety
and
to
our
up
Street
to
companion
cases,
boa
eight,
six,
one,
six,
five,
eight,
sixteen
to
twenty
Gould
Street
and
boa
eight
six,
one,
six,
five
zero
one,
thirty
one
to
one:
thirty:
five
Holton
Street:
this
is
for
antwerp
street.
This
is
building
one
seeking
a
new
construction
of
a
four-story
fourteen
unit,
multi-family
residential
building.
This
would
be
one
of
three
dwellings
located
on
the
same
lot.
The
violation
is
to
Article
51
section
nine.
The
floor
area
ratio
is
excessive.
D
D
R
Members
of
the
boy
Joseph
Easter
for
the
law,
firm
of
McKenzie
and
associates,
183
State,
Street,
Suite,
6,
Boston,
Massachusetts,
0,
2,
1,
0,
9
2.
My
median
right
is
Lord
Lauren
pinup.
She
is
an
associate
in
my
office
and
to
my
left
is
the
developer.
Camera
is
a
he
D.
This
is
a
project.
This
project,
if
I,
could
receive.
Mr.
R
This
is
a
project
which
has
it's
a
mixed
income
residential
development
as
20
residential
units,
which
has
a
mix
of
large
one,
two
and
three-bedroom
units
and
in-unit
laundry
facilities.
There
are
20
on-site
parking
spaces
for
residents
and
two
visitor
parking
spaces.
There
will
be
bicycle
parking,
community
amenity,
space
and
other
support
spaces.
12
units
will
be
deeded,
restricted,
affordable
units,
affordable
to
families,
earning
80%
or
a
hundred
percent
of
the
ami,
which
is
the
area
medium
income.
And
there
will
also
be.
C
R
Restrictions
on
the
market
rate
units
requiring
owner
occupancy
additionally
open
space
was
a
consideration
in
this
proposal,
and
my
client
has
designed
a
project
which
allows
for
50%
of
the
light
will
be
dedicated
the
usable
open
space.
Additionally,
the
project
is
designed
to
be
certified
at
the
lead
for
homes,
gold
level.
R
R
Was
fairly
exhaustive
in
a
sense
that
there
beside
meetings
that
they
had
regularly,
which
are
held
by
B
PDA
when
in
this
type
of
project,
it
was
an
open
house
after
Josephine
Florentine
community
center,
which
was
held
on
April
30th
2018.
And
there
was
a
follow-up
meeting
meeting,
because
there
were
modifications
that
were
addressed
at
that
particular
meeting
which
were
brought
before
the
community
on
a
want
to
meet.
R
As
mr.
fortune
had
mentioned,
there
is
a
there's,
a
variance
for
wall
street
parking
and
loading
for
well
I'll
start
with
90
Antrim
Street.
First,
there
is
a
article
51
section,
50
sheet
or
ste
parking
and
loading
requirement.
I
think
the
issue
there
is
the
loading
requirement
aspect
of
the
of
it,
because
I
should
mention.
We
have
the
requisite.
S
R
T
Cody's
435
in
buildings
at
42,
which
is
as
pretty
similar
to
the
building
surrounding
I,
can
explain.
The
site
is
around
30,000
square
feet
between
you
know
many
town
houses
that
were
built
for
past
15
to
20
years
and
some
of
them
years
older
most
of
the
town
houses
around
here
between
three
to
four
stories,
and
we
tried
to
face
combination
of
the
open
space
and
similar
kind
of
townhouses.
However,
these
town
offices,
some
of
them,
are
connected
to
the
bridges,
so
the
building
yeah
I
mean
they
wanted.
T
R
U
Come
to
the
board.
Thank
you.
My
name
is
Connor
Newman
speaking
on
behalf
of
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services.
We
want
to
voice
our
support
of
this
project.
We
feel
it's
gone
through
the
correct
community
process,
so
we
think
it's
an
exciting
opportunity
for
working
families
in
North,
Brighton
and
Austin.
Thank
you.
V
X
D
Y
Y
Y
A
J
The
lot
here
looks-
and
this
is
my
inexperience,
but
is
the
building
gonna
take
up
the
whole
entire
lot
I
see
here
that
we
have
some
parking
to
the
right
any
of
these
spots
off
of
the
lot,
so
in
other
words,
there's
11
spots
up
to
the
left,
this
six
spots
up
to
the
front
and
then
there's
15
spots
to
the
right
and
13
spots,
and
then
we
have
a
whole
strip
of
land.
There
is
that's
triple
and
part
of
this
this
this
lot.
Yes,.
B
J
I
J
Y
AA
AA
AA
Foot
building
now
and
we've
been-
this-
is
1980
we're
under
the
construction
company
yep.
We
just
want
to
take
that
building
down
we're
gonna
kick
out
a
little
bit
when
we
build
it.
We
went
all
up
the
South
attacked
by
five
feet,
we're
going
to
correct
that,
but
basically
covering
the
same
footprint.
Okay,
we
have
now.
J
Y
A
J
Y
J
B
J
U
Comes
aboard
my
name's
Connor
Newman
speaking
on
behalf
of
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services.
I
would
like
to
voice
our
support
of
the
project
we
held
in
the
butters
meeting
overwhelmingly.
The
abutters
were
in
favor
of
the
project
received
a
letter
from
observer
sport
from
the
Austin
Civic
Association
and
I
received
word
from
the
Brighton
Austin
Improvement
Association
that
they
approved
the
project,
with
the
condition
that
the
BPD
a
reviews,
the
landscape
plan.
The
city
is
satisfied
with
the
steps
that
the
applicant
has
taken,
we're
voicing
our
support
frame
morning.
V
W
A
J
A
D
AB
A
AB
U
A
AC
J
A
D
Boa
eight
one:
zero
80
240,
hiding
Road.
This
is
erect
a
new
four-story
residential
builder
with
nine
residential
units
and
nine
parking
spaces
in
the
garage
at
grade
violations.
Article
67,
section
32,
Osprey
parking
is
insufficient.
Article
60
7,
section
8,
the
multi-family
dwelling
has
have
been
used,
Article
67,
section
I
on
the
floor.
The
ratio
is
excessive,
Article
67,
section
9,
the
building
height
is
excessive
and
stories.
Article
67
section
9,
the
building
height
is
excessive
and
feet.
Article
67,
section
9
usable,
open
spaces,
insufficient
Article,
67,
section
9.
D
AD
AE
AD
AD
Relief,
we
have
lots
of
it
required
is
50
where
75
frontage
50,
where
it's
75
FA
our
0.5,
we're
at
1.4
height,
35
feet
two
and
a
half
stories
where
Western
is
31,
which
is
40
feet.
Front
yard
is
20
we're
eight
to
nine
feet.
Staying
within
the
lines
of
immortal,
sigh
guy,
ten
in
ten,
the
Marriott
40:14
community
process.
We
had
the
butters
meeting
we're
in
a
great
abundant
meeting
where
people
were
supportive
of
the
project,
and
then
we
went
on
the
Mount
Hope
typical
Civic
Association.
AD
A
AF
Good
morning
shared
with
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
Joe
carpenter,
representing
the
mayor's
office
and
neighborhood
services.
We
would
like
to
go
on
record
in
support
of
this
project.
Like
John
said
they
did
present
to
the
mountain
hold
Pacific
group.
It
was
received
well
as
well
as
health
and
abutters
meeting
back
in
tune
by
Keith
Williams.
D
A
Z
A
A
D
Voa
eight
eight
one:
zero
zero
three
seven
Clementine
park,
and
this
is
our
free
parking
for
two
vehicles:
the
violations,
article
9
section,
one
extension
of
a
non-conforming
use,
article
10
section,
one
limitation
of
off
street
parking,
monocle,
65,
section,
65,
41
manoeuvrability,
an
article
65
section,
I
and
II
usable,
open
space
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
A
J
A
AG
A
AH
A
AI
Because
it
is
front
yard
parking
and
again
you
know,
otherwise
it
would
be
a
one
to
one
ratio
and
that's
privatizing.
The
on
street
parking.
That's
already
there.
It's
a
tough
situation,
it's
right
at
shammed
station,
but
it's
still
you
know
it
would
only
be
one
space.
There's
no
benefit
to
the
city.
A
AJ
A
D
Following
your
next
case,
calling
VOA,
seven
nine
three
three
three:
seven
ten
bloomington
street
wilmington
street
yeah.
This
is
an
enclosed,
existing
deck
on
the
right
side
of
the
building
and
stay
away,
violation,
topical
65-69,
the
fluid
a
ratio
is
excessive
and
article
65
section
I
and
the
side,
god
is
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
AK
AK
A
A
I
A
AJ
Mr.
chairmembers,
the
for
Patrick
van
del
mayor's
office
in
Neighborhood
Services,
were
here
to
speak
in
support
of
this
project.
The
community
process
to
correct
this
violation
was
conducted
under
the
previous
liaison
David
Cotter,
and
they
have
been
working
with
the
appropriate
members
of
Iasi
to
correct
the
violation.
So
here.
D
Forward
and
all
you
want
to
do
all
for
you
want
to
do
all
eight
I
know:
that's
separated,
I'm,
sorry,
alright,
so
we'll
take
them
individually,
because
we
have
four
wrapped
up
and
four
wrapped
up
with
different
addresses.
So
this
is
a
companion
case
or
another
companion
cases,
VOA,
eight
five,
three
seven
one
one
one:
fourteen
Floyd
Street
VOA,
eight,
five,
three,
seven
one,
two
one:
sixteen
Floyd,
Street,
sorry
and
boa
eight
five,
three,
seven
one:
zero
19,
Aspen
Street.
D
What
I'm
gonna
do
is
do
those
four
and
then
we'll
do
the
next
four,
because
you
guys
can
stay
there.
So
this
is
4:17.
This
is
subdivide
lot
into
two
law,
its
law
to
a
2622
square
feet
and
lot
be
2276
square
feet
and
they
wrecked
a
new
semi-attached
single-family
dwelling
unit
a
lot
a
proposed
one
off
street
parking
control.
It,
as
the
dwelling
is
attached
to
nineteen
ashton
project,
is
part
of
the
neighborhood
homes
initiative
violations,
article
60,
section
9,
the
lot
areas
insufficient,
an
article
60
section,
9
of
the
front
yard,
is
insufficient.
D
D
This
is
for
114
Floyd
Street.
This
is
subdivide
lot
into
two
arts
latte
to
be
three
thousand
forty
seven
square
feet
and
a
lot
be
to
be
three
thousand
two
hundred
eighty
seven
square
feet.
They
wrecked
a
new
semi-attached
single-family
dwelling
unit
on
latte
and
proposed
one
our
street
parking.
The
dwelling
is
attached
to
one
to
sixteen
Lloyd
Street
violations.
Article
10
section,
one
limitation
area,
location
of
Austria
parking
shall
not
be
less
than
five
feet
from
the
side.
Lot
line,
an
article
sixty
section,
nine,
the
front
yard
is
insufficient
and
116.
D
A
AN
N
A
D
Chair
call
the
next
four
cases:
boa
eat:
six:
five:
seven:
five:
zero
105,
Stratton
Street,
boa
eight,
six,
five,
seven,
four:
seven
107
status
tree,
boa
age,
six,
five,
seven,
four:
four
123
Stratton
Street,
boa
8,
6,
5,
7,
4,
2,
1,
25
stratum,
105
Stratton.
This
is
subdivide
lot
into
two
large
claw
day
to
be
two
thousand
eight.
Forty
six
and
a
lot
be
to
be
3,000.
114
erecting
new
semi-attached
single
family,
drawing
proposed
one
off
street
parking
dwelling
is
attached
to
107
two
violations.
Article
sixty
section
nine
front
yard
is
insufficient.
D
D
This
is
for
123
Stratton
straight.
This
is
subdivide
lot.
What
hate
the
3156?
The
want
B
to
be
2873
in
erect
a
new
single-family
dwelling
law,
a
lot
a
proposed
one
off
street
parking
violation,
article
60,
section,
nine
front
yard
is
insufficient
and
for
125
Stratton-
and
this
is
the
created
lock
beat
of
2000.
He
has
a
descending
three
square
feet,
but
one
off
the
Pocky
in
the
same
violation:
article
60
section
I.
AD
A
AN
A
A
AN
AN
A
J
N
D
Your
next
case
calling
VOA
8
6
8
7
5
0
89,
Sydney
Street.
This
is
a
removing
existing
wood
structure,
the
foundation
to
remain
and
build
a
new
three-story
building
the
violations.
Article
65
section
41,
our
street
parking
is
insufficient.
Article
65,
section
9
the
floor.
Tear
ratio
is
excessive
and
article
65
section
9.
The
rail
yard
is
insufficient
name
an
address
for
the
record.
Please.
AO
AO
The
project
is
a
proposed
three
family
dwelling
in
a
two
film
of
scrutiny,
a
three
family
mm
district
on
a
2800
square
foot
lot.
The
community
process
started
in
June
with
the
meeting
before
the
Columbia
Seven
Hills
Civic
Association
planning
committee
meeting.
There
was
an
about
us
meeting
in
August
a
return
to
the
planning
committee
in
September
in
a
presentation
to
the
full
Columbia
Savin
Hill
Civic
Association
in
October.
AO
As
far
as
the
violations
are
concerned,
the
rear
yard
setback
is
actually
there
is
an
additional
20
feet
between
the
actual
lot
line
and
what
is
considered
the
the
back
yard,
and
that
is
because
it
is
up
next
to
the
MBTA
right-of-way.
There
is
a
brick
wall
between
the
property,
the
right
of
way
and
the
MBTA
tracks.
AO
AO
What
is
required
is
1.3
and
what
is
proposed
is
1.6.
The
average
size
of
each
unit
is
approximately
1,200
square
feet.
The
proposed
building
will
be
a
three
family
dwelling
in
between
two
existing
three
family
dwellings
and
located
pretty
exactly
in
the
middle
between
savathun
MBTA
station
and
Columbia,
or
rather
JFK
UMass.
A
AO
A
AO
A
AO
AO
A
A
L
AH
AJ
This
is
the
board
Patrick
van
del
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services,
the
applicant
hadn't
abutters
meeting
on
August
15th
and
met
with
the
Columbia
Savin
Hill
Association
two
times.
I
would
also
like
to
note
that
the
applicant
was
very
quick
to
make
changes
given
some
of
the
abutters
concerns.
A
AJ
J
A
A
D
C
D
Of
a
date
of
December
18th.
D
AQ
P
A
D
AH
AG
D
D
Boah
0,
4,
7,
8,
7,
2,
2,
4,
wood,
wood,
wood,
wood,
Park
Street.
This
is
seeking
to
possible
to
inform
one
parcel
with
4,500
square
feet,
also
to
erect
a
three-story
dwelling
with
three
residential
units
and
three
parking
spaces
to
be
accessed
from
a
new
car
up
off
of
Folsom
Street.
The
violation
is
article
50,
section,
29,
insufficient
large
size.
Five
thousand
square
feet
is
the
minimum
required
article
50
section
29
addition:
sufficient
additional
Lodi
area
per
unit,
2,500
square
feet
unit,
equal
50,
section,
29,
excessive
FAI,
even
address
of.
AS
AS
AS
A
AC
J
AQ
A
N
Morning,
mr.
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
faceis
Sharif
with
the
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood
Services.
We
would
like
to
go
on
record
and
support.
There
were
two
abutters
meetings
that
were
held.
They
have
incorporated
some
of
those
feedback
into
their
current
proposal
and
they
have
also
agreed
to
beautify
the
areas
around.
The
lot
in
question.
I
know
that
there
are
some
concerns
from
one
of
the
director
butters,
but
in
both
meetings
that
we
had
there
was
adequate
support
for
the
project.
Thank
you.
I
C
AT
A
AS
AS
X
A
A
D
The
next
case
calling
boa
eight
five,
six,
two
three
four
forty
three
Rockland
Street.
This
is
twelve
twelve
additional
parking
for
the
church
to
release
street
parking
violations.
Article
fifty
section
50,
forty
one
point:
two
screening
and
buffering
shall
be
provided
within
the
residential
sub
district
article.
Fifty
section,
28
ancillary
parking
is
a
conditional
use
for
this
location,
an
article
50,
section,
43
location,
no
parking
shall
be
located
and
any
part
of
the
required
front
yard
name
an
address
for
the
record.
Please!
Yes,.
S
Russell
Holmes
82
Dale
Road,
the
Church
of
Christ
in
Roxbury,
located
81
Walnut
Avenue
has
been
there
for
70
years
and
we
have
been
expanding
and
we
brought
the
lot
right
behind
it
to
to
cut
in
to
get
some
additional
parking
ten
years
ago
and
so
and
the
location
of
Rockland
and
walnut
has
a
very
bad
intersection.
And
so
we've
been
losing
parking.
That
was
three
parking.
S
And
so
we've
been
using
it
for
four
or
five
years,
and
so
we
want
to
now
move
to
not
just
use
it
just
as
an
ad
hoc
parking,
but
they
actually
removed
the
asphalt
to
put
in
the
curb
cut
and
actually
put
into
twelve
of
those
spots
that
that
we
think
would
be
good.
We
also
want
to
fence
it
off
because,
as
you
can
imagine
anywhere
in
the
city,
folks
seem
to
just
used
a
lot
forever.
They
want
to
have
parties,
they
thought
it
was
all
of
a
sudden,
their
their
garage.
S
We're
literally
we'd,
go
out
there
and
people
are
repairing
cars
and
a
lot
and
we
they
move.
We
moved
from
them
off
the
lot
into
the
street
and
we've
been
just
trying
to
encourage
them
not
to
use
the
lot
so
we're
hoping
to
put
up
a
fence
and
put
the
curb
cut
in
and
use
it
primarily
for
Sunday
and
Wednesday
overflow.
S
J
AH
AT
S
Is
the
other
thing
I
would
add?
Is
we've
been
going
back
and
forth
for
a
couple
years?
We
did
have
obviously
letters
from
there
butters
four
or
five
years
ago
and
Josh
McFadden
and
the
team
asked
us
to
go
out
again.
We
got
new
letters
for
all
the
abutters
on
the
street,
because
it's
primary
Rockland
that
is
going
to
see
the
parking
because
we
try
not
to
park
on
the
main
road.
N
Good
morning,
mr.
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
face
a
shriek,
but
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services.
We
would
like
to
go
on
record
and
support
it's
a
bit
of
a
no-brainer.
This
is
an
issue
faced
by
many
faith
institutions
across
the
city,
and
we
believe
that
this
parking
will
help
the
church
but,
more
importantly,
help
the
neighborhood
alleviate
this
street
parking
that
currently
exists.
Thank
you.
A
D
Your
next
case
calling
boa
eight
four
four
zero
one:
seven
thirty
to
forty
seven
to
thirty
to
forty
nine
Washington
Street.
This
is
a
secret
to
erect
a
three-story
building
with
two
years
intentional
units
in
two
parking
spaces
violations:
article
10
section,
one:
a
limitation
of
area,
parking
area,
article,
fifty
section
29,
the
floor
area
ratio
is
excessive
in
article
50
section
29.
The
lot
size
to
erect
a
three
family
dwelling
is
insufficient.
Article
50
section
29
the
floor
day
ratios
insufficient
article
50
section
29,
the
front
yard
setback
requirement
is
insufficient.
D
AS
Changes
this
particular
zoning
district
is
a
three
out.
Four
thousand
votes
over
building
square
footage
would
be
three
thousand
eight
hundred
eighty
four
square
feet:
building
32
feet.
Our
original
proposal
was
a
four-story
building,
five
minutes
and
four
parking
spaces
over
that
period
of
eight
months,
we'll
cut
back
and
I
swear
footage
of
fifteen
hundred
and
ninety
seven
square
feet
going
down
from
five
thousand
481
the
3084.
As
was
mentioned,
our
units
have
gone
from
five
to
three.
Our
stories
from
four
to
three
in
height,
our
height
is
144
feet
to
32.
AS
Two
feet
to
four
feet:
three
inches
and
on
a
rear
yard
has
gone
from
6
inches
to
9
feet,
five
inches
the
unit's
all
2-bedroom
2-bath
thousand
forty
weeks
where
feet
is
the
first
floor.
1201
square
feet
was
the
second
and
third,
as
was
mentioned,
he
did
get
the
support
of
the
jpn,
see
on
this
project.
A
AU
My
name
is
chairman
members
of
the
board,
Alex
Valdez,
mayor's
office
and
neighborhood
services.
We
would
like
to
go
and
record
to
support
also
stated
that
Jamaica
Plain
neighborhood
council
voted
to
support
the
project.
They
had
several
meetings
with
the
eggless
of
Square
Neighborhood
Association,
and
also
made
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
changes
to
the
plans
throughout
the
time
again,
we
would
like
to
echo
our
support
good.
AV
Morning
mr.
chair
members
of
the
board
will
pop
Webster
from
City
Council
matt
O'malley's
office
we'd,
also
like
to
go
on
record
in
support
aside
from
the
merits
of
the
project
on
a
vacant
lot
in
Jamaica
Plain.
We
also
want
to
commend
City
Realty
for
their
work,
that
they're
expected
to
continue
with
the
Neighborhood
Association
on
broader
issues
and
trust
that
there
will
be
sincere
efforts
in
that
regard.
Thank
you.
A
A
A
D
You
next
case
calling
VOA
eight
five
zero
one,
seven
eight
to
thirty
five
Northampton
Street.
This
is
to
extend
first-floor
living
space
into
the
basement,
with
new
bedrooms
and
baths
and
renovate
the
basement
with
new
walls
floors
and
sailing
the
violations.
Article
9
section
1,
the
existing
building
already
has
excessive
fluid
a
ratio.
Newly
converted
space
will
do
an
ad
to
a
non
conformance
article
50,
section,
20
and
I,
and
the
floor.
Near
ratio
was
excessive
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
AW
Yes,
my
name
is
Hazuki
efrat
I'm,
the
architect
for
the
project,
I've
been
working
with
red
and
since
2012
just
a
brief
history.
This
project
started
out
in
2012
with
a
much
larger
addition
on
the
rear.
At
that
time,
the
board
approved
that
project.
However,
mrs.
red
did
not
move
forward
because
it
was
a
fairly
larger
project
for
her
tackle
at
that
time,
and
she
decided
to
wait
now
that
approval
has
has
expired.
AW
AW
The
basement
actually
is
a
ground
floor
because
there
is
access
out
of
the
rear
on
great
access
out
of
the
rear
on
the
on
the
ground
for
a
level
so,
but
so
proposal
is
to
for
her
to
move
to
the
first
floor,
which
you
would
have
a
kitchen
living
room
and
half
bath
that
she
would
then
occupied
the
hopefully
proposed
basement
renovation,
which
will
include
two
bedrooms:
a
bath,
a
closet.
It's
also
important
to
mention
that
the
basement
ceiling
height
would
be
seven
feet.
AW
A
AW
AW
One
bedroom
would
be
access
window
as
per
code,
minimum
max
444
inches
from
the
floor,
and
the
window
will
be
a
size
given
the
code
requirement.
Also,
there
is
a
common
hallway,
not
a
common
hallway,
but
there's
a
hallway
that
leads
from
the
for
both
bedrooms,
a
rear
exit
door
which
is
actually
on
greyed
out
to
the
alley
in
there
to
a
stream
as
well.
A
AW
Sorry,
yes,
there's
a
new
stairway,
though
she's
she's
doing
it.
There's
an
existing
stair
from
the
first
floor
to
the
basement.
She's
gonna
make
the
proper,
enclosed
enclosures
and
include
that
in
their
apartment.
So
she
start
like
a
PI
any
common
space.
They
don't
really
get
to
the
basement,
be
private
space.
A
AW
AW
N
Good
morning,
mr.
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
phases
shariq,
with
the
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood,
Services
I
did
hold
on
a
butters
meeting
on
this,
and
her
neighbors
did
support
the
project.
We
also
had
a
Civic
Association
meeting
regarding
us
as
well,
and
they
were
also
in
support.
It's
really.
A
modest
proposal
are
the
whole
points
to
make
the
basement
more
accessible
for
the
owner.
Thank
You.
AL
A
D
Last
case,
the
9:30
calling
boa
eight
three
five:
seven
nine
769
Burrell
Street.
This
is
a
change
oxygen
from
a
three
residential
units
to
commercial
spaces,
to
five
residential
units
and
construct
a
new
exterior
spiral.
Staircase
the
violations,
article
50
section
28,
a
multi-family
dwelling-
is
live
in
News
article
50,
section
29,
the
additional
lotta
areas,
insufficient
article
50,
section
29,
the
usable
open
space
is
insufficient.
Article
50,
section
29.
The
side
yard
is
insufficient.
Article
50
section
43,
our
street
parking
is
insufficient
in
article
9,
section
2.
AX
Rs.15
Broad,
Street
and
bosses
with
me
today
is
James
Christopher
from
RCA
crossing
architects
and
holding
ELISA
from
fan.
K
development,
as
mentioned
we're
here
this
morning,
seeking
to
change
the
occupancy
from
three
residential
units
and
two
commercial
spaces,
five
residential
units,
and
also
to
construct
at
exteriors
exterior
spiral
staircase
for
rear
egress.
As
mentioned
some
violations
additional
lot
insufficient
we're
required
to
have
two
thousand
square
feet
per
unit.
We
don't
have
any
additional
lot
area.
Open
space
probably
have
650
square
feet
for
a
unit
which
we
do
not
have.
AX
The
existing
footprint
is
staying,
the
same
side,
yard,
violation,
you're,
wired
up
ten
feet,
there's
a
pre-existing
violation
as
well
or
on
the
lot
line
on
the
left,
and
we
have
ten
feet
to
the
right
to
the
left
of
the
violation
parking.
Each
of
the
new
two
units
is
required
to
have
a
space.
Unfortunately,
as
I
mentioned,
there's
no
existing
parking
right
now
and
the
footprints
not
changing,
so
we're
not
offering
any
additional
parking
and
finally
changing
non-conforming
use.
The
existing
three
units
and
commercial
spaces
is
non-conforming
and
the
proposed
five
units
remain
non-conforming.
AX
N
Morning,
mr.
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
faces
Sherif
with
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services.
We
would
like
to
go
on
record
and
support.
One
thing
that
we
do
want
to
know
is
we'd
like
for
them
to
work
on
issues
around
parking
because
of
increased
density.
With
this
current
proposal,
Thank
You.
AL
AX
A
J
D
D
This
is
the
raise
the
existing
building
erecting
new
three-story
three
family
dwelling
with
four
parking
spaces
at
garage.
The
violation
is
article
27
s
dash
five.
This
is
in
the
iPod
applicability
due
to
erecting
a
building
or
structure
having
a
gross
floor
area
greater
than
one
thousand
square
feet.
Nautical
68
section,
33
maneuvering
our
street
parking
manoeuvre
and
loading
article
68,
section
8
front
yard,
is
insufficient.
An
article
68
side
yard
is
insufficient
in
article
68,
section,
8
really
isn't
sufficient.
Its
name
of
that
just.
D
AY
So
the
proposal
is
to
raise
the
existing
securely
building
constructed
new
tree
dwelling
building
we
met
with
the
director
butters
cross-disability.
We
have
two
meetings,
we
went
to
the
city
side,
Civic
means
the
project
is
supported.
I
also
have
to
recognize
one
consider
from
the
rear,
but
up
mrs.
Hennessey
regarding
the
screening
of
buffering
at
the
rear
of
the
property
which
will
address
with
tensing
and
struts.
C
A
A
AR
A
AZ
J
A
D
AZ
BA
Chairman,
madam
Maddox
of
the
board
members
of
the
Warsaw
Anna
from
councillors
links
office.
We
would
like
to
go
in
opposition
to
this
project.
They
have
been
approved
for
the
size
that
it
is
now
the
roof
deck
the
directive.
Others
are
fine
with
it,
but
they
don't.
They
don't
want
them
to
be
bigger.
They
they
don't
want
it
to
be
extended.
A
J
D
Telling
your
next
case
calling
boa
8
4
9,
0,
8,
4,
70,
Charles
Street.
This
is
to
extend
office
use
into
it
in
extend
office.
Use
the
residential
space
in
the
tower,
including
the
provision
of
accessible
entrance
off
issues,
will
be
on
all
levels
of
the
former
residents,
including
basement
and
entrance
levels.
The
violations
article
15
section,
1,
the
fluid
a
ratio
is
excessive
in
article
9,
section
1.
This
extension
of
a
non-conforming
use
name
an
address
for
the
record.
Please.
AD
BD
A
BD
An
extension
of
the
office
uses
that
are
currently
occupy
the
second
third
and
fourth
floor,
but
non-conforming
use
aspect
is
in
order
to
preserve
retail
along
Charles
Street
and
the
change
at
the
ground
floor
and
basement
level
are
the
former
residents
and
it's
not
it's
not
a
buddy
I
mean
it's
not
fronting
on
Charles
Street,
so
there's
no
visual
change
of
any
kind
and
there's
no
affectation
of
the
intensity.
Zoning
that
requires
that
non-conforming
use.
BE
Members
of
the
board
just
saw
her
with
the
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood
Services.
We
would
like
to
go
on
record
and
support.
We
did
have
a
very
positive
committee
process
where
there
were
no
questions
or
concerns
from
neither
the
abutters
or
the
Civic
Association.
We
have
a
letter
of
support
from
Beacon
Hill
Civic
that
was
presented
to
you
and
at
the
abutters
meeting,
everyone
was
in
full
support
of
the
work
going
on
inside
the
building
and
created
and
also
preserving
the
building
itself.
Thank
you.
A
A
D
A
BF
Right
Thank
You
mr.
chair
members
of
the
board,
so
I
am
here
today
with
Brent
Burke,
who
is
my
employer
and
one
of
the
owners
and
co-operators
of
94
Charles
Street,
and
we
are
here
to
propose
a
change
of
views
from
what
is
now
nine
residential
apartments
back
to
nine
hotels
or
executive
suite
units.
The
building
is
already
fully
sprinkled
with
a
fully
addressable
alarm
system
and
absolutely
no
work
is
proposed
on
the
exterior
or
interior
of
the
building
such
change.
BF
What
allows
to
continue
operating
operating
the
property,
as
we
have
since
finishing
renovation
back
in
2013
prior
to
us,
purchasing
the
property
from
the
previous
owners
in
2012.
The
property
was
run
as
a
hotel
since
back
in
1998,
and
it
was
dubbed
the
Charles
Street
and
and
still
carries
that
title
today,
given
the
property's
location
on
Charles
Street,
which
is
a
highly
commercialized
portion
of
Beacon
Hill
and
his
past
use
as
a
hotel.
We
believe
that
the
proposed
use
would
be
in
keeping
with
that
of
the
surrounding
area.
BF
As
a
result
of
the
legislation
which
dictates
that
anything
that
is
let
for
less
than
28
days
is
considered
a
short-term
rental,
we
felt
that
we
needed
to
fall
within
the
definition
of
a
hotel
in
order
to
continue
to
run
the
business,
as
is
so.
The
average
length
of
stay
is
probably
around
seven
nights,
but
some
stays
there
as
long
as
90
nights.
Some
are
as
little
as
two,
so
we
had
to
fit
them
all.
Given
the
change
I.
A
BF
BE
Mr.
chair
members
of
the
board
over
at
the
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood
Services,
who
would
like
to
go
on
record
and
support
the
Beacon
Hill
Civic
Association
has
submitted
a
letter
of
non
opposition
while
they
do
echo
some
of
the
concerns
that
were
relayed
to
us
at
the
abutters
meeting.
It's
just
concerns
of
the
use
of
Airbnb
causing
traffic
and
not
knowing
the
neighbors
and
trash
and
stuff
like
that.
BE
A
A
BE
A
AB
D
La
eight
four,
three:
five:
five:
five
eighty-three
Chestnut
Street:
this
is
construct
a
new
roof
deck
and
head
house
with
a
retractable
hatch.
The
deck
and
head
else
are
not
visible
from
the
public
way
violation.
Article
15
section,
one
Cloutier
ratio
is
excessive
in
article
20
section.
One
rail
yard
is
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
BG
BG
That
we
are
now
only
seeking
a
variance
with
respect
to
at
they
are
the
current
at
they
are
for
the
property
is
2.8.
The
proposed
addition
will
Brady,
as
they
are
up
to
two
point
eight
years,
so
it
is
a
very
modest
amount
of
zoning
relief
that
we
are
seeking.
There
is
no
other
usable
outdoor
space
for
the
family.
BG
BH
BE
Mr.
chair
members
of
the
board
just
saw
her
at
the
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood
Services.
We
would
like
to
go
on
record
and
support.
They
have
a
letter
of
support
from
the
Beacon
Hill
Civic
Association
also
support
from
all
the
director
butters.
So
at
this
time
we
have
no
questions
or
concerns.
Thank
you.
D
BI
Or
3x,
which
will
project
six
feet
up
into
the
rear
yard
being
supported
by
brackets,
it
will
be
sent
back
one
foot
from
the
property
line
to
be
consistent
with
the
adjoining
property.
34
also
I'd,
like
to
mention
for
the
record
that
we
have
agreed
to
some
unrelated
cosmetic
changes.
We
are
altering
the
drain
pipe
between
36
and
34
diameter,
from
4
inches
to
3
inches
and
of
the
same
kinda
see
the
joining
drain
pipe
on
the
other
side
of
of
34:20
street.
BI
N
Good
morning,
mr.
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
faced.
A
Sharif
with
the
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood,
Services
I
did
hold
on
a
butters
meeting
in
which
the
Civic
Association
president
was
in
attendance.
Along
with
the
director
butters.
There
was
a
concern
about
how
close
this
deck
was
to
the
adjacent
deck
of
the
director
butter,
but
they
did
work
with
that
of
butter
to
hold
the
deck
in
a
bit
and
based
on
that
feedback,
we
would
like
to
go
on
record
and
support.
BA
A
BJ
BC
W
D
An
existing
structure
and
erect
a
four-story
dwelling
with
six
residential
units,
a
five
parking
spaces
Bill's
building,
will
also
include
two
roof
decks
violations.
Article
10,
section
1
proposed
pocket
is
within
5
feet
of
the
side
yard
article
25
section
5,
it's
a
flood
hazard
district
article
53,
section
8,
a
multi-family
is
forbidden,
article
53,
section,
56
number
of
parking
spaces,
insufficient
article
53
section.
I
in
addition,
a
lot
of
areas.
D
It's
efficient
article,
53,
section
9,
the
fluidity
ratios
excessive
article
53,
section
9,
the
building
height
successor
of
the
stories
article
53
section
9,
the
villain
height
is
excessive
and
feet.
Article
53,
section,
I,
usable
open
space
is
insufficient.
Article
53
section
9,
the
front
yard
is
insufficient.
Article
53
section
9,
the
side
yard
is
insufficient.
The
article
53
section
9,
the
rear
yard,
is
insufficient
name
an
address
for
the
record.
Please.
AS
Raise
the
existing
structure
and
erect
a
four-story
building
for
the
six
residential
condominium
units
and
five
partner
spaces.
This
particular
zoning
district
is
three
f2000
lot
sizes
2,500
square
feet.
Height
of
the
proposed
building
is
39
feet,
six
inches.
He
worked
with
the
Paris
flats
community
group
and
the
abutters
they've
been
a
part
of
six
months
to
make
a
number
of
modifications
on
this
project.
Two
of
the
units
will
reduce
from
two
beds
to
one
bedroom
units.
We
increased
our
rare
green
space
and
beyond
for
our
neighbors,
and
we
agreed
to
have
no
roof
decks.
AS
C
AS
A
C
BK
Of
the
board,
this
was
Garcia
with
the
mayor's
office
owner
broker
services.
We
have
Santa
butters
medium
for
this
project
and
during
the
community
process,
they
received
a
support
from
the
director
butters,
the
Civic
Association
vote
in
support
for
the
proposal,
and,
as
the
attorney
mentioned,
the
commitment
was
not
to
provide
cap
house
or
gtex
and
other
recommendations
from
the
board.
They
submit
a
letter
in
support.
Thank
you.
BL
A
A
A
AR
A
A
D
F
D
F
Members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
George
Moran,
see
I'm
an
attorney
with
the
business
address
at
350,
West,
Broadway
and
South
Boston.
This
matter
has
one
previous
deferral:
the
proposal,
here's
solid
a
two
Lots
correct
in
addition
to
an
existing
three
family
dwelling
and
change
occupancy
to
six
units.
One
of
the
parcels
involved
is
a
parcel
which
went
through
a
DND
disposition
process
we're
currently
working
with
DND
to
go
forward
with
the
plan,
but
in
a
way
that
would
create
an
affordable
unit
at
the
site.
F
A
AY
D
AY
D
AY
Christopher
of
rclc,
with
the
project
architects,
with
the
business
addressable
415
upon
sat-nav
at
this
time,
with
request
a
brief
deferral,
we've
met
with
the
neighbors
informally
and
been
in
communication
via
email.
We've
significantly
redesigned
the
building,
we'd
like
to
have
another
formal
about
his
meeting
and
meet
with
the
civic
group.
If
that
deems
that
is
deemed
necessary.
D
D
AD
We're
working
with
an
institutional
of
butter
to
effectuate
a
sale
of
this
parcel
to
them,
so
we're
just
dealing
with
it's
not
like
selling
to
one
of
you
would
stand
with
board
of
directors,
and
things
like
that.
So
that's
where
we're
at
right
now
so
we're
just
basically
and
then
it
doesn't
come
before
the
board.
This
whole
project
goes
away.
BD
A
BE
BM
D
D
BK
BL
A
D
Violation
is
article
53,
section
I
on
excessive
FA
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
AC
AC
BL
BN
Good
morning
my
name
is
Cheryl
Brown
and
I
am
the
owner
of
310
Paris
Street,
which
is
right
next
door.
There
is
a
3-foot
gap
Ali
period.
The
roof
levels
are
the
same
level.
I
am
opposing
the
roof
deck
I'm,
not
opposing
the
renovations
of
the
veer
at
the
house.
I
am
opposing
the
roof
deck.
It
becomes
a
quality
issue.
I
am
I'm
the
one
with
the
flower
boxes.
BN
Yes,
so
if
it
becomes
a
quality-of-life
issue
for
that
entire
neighborhood,
there
is
a
very,
very
small
postage
stamp
Ali.
That's
it
it's
very
congested
and
if
they
would
have
tenants
on
that
roof
deck,
they
do
not
follow
all
the
tenant
rules.
For
example,
if
they
have
a
grill
which
is
illegal
on
the
roof
smoking,
because
the
houses
are
so
close,
I
literally
can
touch
the
house
behind
me
on
Bennington
Street,
so
I
am
opposing
the
rooftop
deck.
The
other
renovations
to
the
house,
I
think
are
adequate.
BN
Not
to
mention
sorry,
not
to
mention
that
that
is
all
Paris
flats
and
those
cellars
below
sea
level,
and
they
have
dug
down
and
has
caused
some
significant
water
damage
in
the
neighborhood.
So
I
just
you
know,
we'll
deal
with
the
water
damage
and
we'll
deal
with
the
flooding
that
happens
as
a
result
of
their
digging.
However,
you
know
it
becomes
an
issue
for
the
whole
neighborhood
and
I'm
speaking
on
behalf
of
my
other
neighbors
as
well.
A
J
A
BP
Very
properties,
it's
roughly
twelve
feet
above
street
level,
and
the
current
access
to
the
home
is
by
a
series
of
steps
and
walkways,
both
of
which
of
the
proven
to
be
last
four
years.
We're
seeking
to
improve
the
property
by
improving
access
to
safety,
to
the
primary
entry
ways
into
the
home,
which
are
on
the
north
end.
BP
We
did
have
a
positive
community
process.
We
invited
sixty
of
our
neighbors
over
for
a
abutment
meeting.
We
had
about
15,
show
up
and
all
were
in
support
of
the
process.
The
violation
of
this
particular
case
is
that
we
have
a
driveway
that
is
directly
in
front
of
the
home,
does
not
go
directly
into
a
garage.
The
property
was
never
built
with
a
garage
or
driveway.
We
have
looked
into
other
options.
The
issue
here,
one
we.
BP
Over
the
topography
of
our
land
cuz,
we
are
up
on
a
bit
of
a
hill,
and
the
other
issue
is
that
we
just
don't
have
the
adequate
space
to
put
in
the
driveway
either
ends
of
the
property.
Look
at
installing
a
can
driveway
on
the
south
end
of
property
in
the
packet.
That's
figured
1
2
and
the
issue.
There
is
again
1.
It
does
not
achieve
our
primary
objective,
which
is
to
prove
improve
safety
and
accessibility
to
the
property,
because
there
are
no
entry
points
to
the
house.
BP
From
that
end,
the
other
issue
is
just
pure
clearance.
We
only
have
13
feet
between
us
and
the
neighbor
or
to
the
property
line.
I
should
say,
and
the
issue
is
that
for
Kirk
now
we
need
to
have
5
feet
for
the
birth
occurs,
because
according
to
the
application
and
so
five
feet,
but
the
10
foot
wide
driveway,
which
is
the
minimum
for
that,
puts
us
into
our
living
room
so
that
doesn't
really
work
from.
A
BP
BP
BH
BP
A
BO
A
AH
A
A
A
A
BO
BO
A
BP
BO
AH
Mr.
chairman,
to
address
your
question,
we
could
look
at
pushing
the
parking
to
the
other
side
of
the
property
and
you
know
have
them
park
one
in
front
of
the
other,
so
you
don't
have
the
either
the
vehicles
so
close
to
the
street.
I,
don't
know
how
much
space
they
have
on
the
on
the
left
side
of
the
house
between
the
edge
of
the
house
and
the
abutting
property.
A
AH
BP
AH
BP
BO
A
C
D
BP
D
Think
this
chair
just
said
that
you
know
he
understands
that.
We
understand
that
we
don't
usually
grant
front
yet
parking
and
that's
why
mr.
Pazhani
had
brought
that
up
to
you
to
try
to
ease
that
solution
was
to
try
to
look
at
the
left-hand
side
of
the
house.
Have
you
guys
looked
at
it
or
no?
We
have.
BO
AF
BP
J
A
lot
of
meat
on
this
bone,
it
seems
like
there's
a
lot
to
go
here.
A
couple
of
problems
we
have
with
it
is
that
the
sizes
are
too
small.
You're
gonna
hang
over
the
parking
lot.
I
mean
hang
over
the
sidewalk,
which
is
a
concern
right.
We
want
to
recognize
it,
you
guys
have
a
concern
and
we
want
to
be
helpful
to
that,
but
we
typically
do
not
approve
front
yard
parking.
J
C
BP
BP
BP
A
BO
BP
BP
BP
A
E
D
This
erected
to
family
residential
dwelling
on
existing
vacant
lot
violates
article
69
section
29
insufficient,
packing
1.5
unit
times
x,
street
parking
spaces
required
article
69,
section
30,
driveway
access
with
10
feet,
article
69
69,
insufficient
front
yard;
article
69,
insufficient
Raigad
article
69,
insufficient
lot
size,
article
69
insufficient
lot
with
article
69
69
insufficient
lot
with
frontage
article
69
section
in
excess
of
FA
article
69,
section
9
its
mission
side
yard
and
article
69
69
insufficient
usable,
open
space.
We
have
an
address
for
the
record.
Please.
AP
AP
AP
AP
J
A
AX
AF
AE
J
A
J
C
BR
Afternoon
mr.
chair
members
of
the
board,
Brian
Flynn,
hi,
PAC
liaison
with
the
mayor's
office
in
Neighborhood
Services,
want
to
go
on
record
in
support
of
this
proposal.
To
echo
what
mr.
small
was
saying,
there
was
an
extensive
community
process
with
multiple
about
his
visions.
The
community
was
vehemently
opposed
to
a
two
family.
However,
the
attorney
as
well
as
the
developer
were
very
reasonable
to
work
with
the
community
and
they
brought
down
to
a
single
family,
and
we
want
to
go
and
record
in
full
support
of
it.
Thank
you.
BS
D
Look
at
boa
eight
five,
nine
one,
eight
three
32
Wentworth
Street.
This
directly
knew
three
family
dwelling
on
existing
vacant.
Lot
proposed
303
parking
violations,
nautical
65-42
side
yard
with
off
street
parking.
Driveway
cannot
be
less
than
ten
feet
wide.
They
go
65
section
9
a
lot
size
to
erect
a
tree
feeling
colony
is
insufficient.
Not
equal,
65,
section
9
at
logged
with
requirement
is
insufficient.
Article
65
section
9.
A
lot
frontage
is
insufficient.
Article
65,
the
ploidy,
a
ratio
is
excessive.
D
AP
AP
C
AP
A
AQ
BT
A
Z
BT
As
I
was
saying,
I
own
the
house
to
the
left
of
it,
my
name
is
Jerome,
Cox
and
I'm
concerned
that
there
isn't
reasonable
space
between
the
houses.
It's
a
very
small
lot.
At
the
last
hearing
they
had
mentioned
that
they
were
gonna
reach
out
to
it
butters
and
tell
us
about
the
plans
I
haven't
heard
from
anybody
since
then,
at
all,
the
lot
is
approximately
25
feet
wide,
my
measurements
so
I,
don't
know
how
you
can
get
a
driveway
in
there
and
a
house
it
Just's.
BT
A
AE
A
AP
D
A
eight
one,
five,
three,
eight
five:
five:
seventy
eight
Gallivan
Boulevard.
This
is
the
change
of
our
key
from
a
two
family
to
a
three
family,
a
new
dwelling
unit
extended
into
the
basement
and
garage
and
proposed
five.
Our
street
parking
violations,
article
65
section
8,
a
3
family
dwelling-
is
a
forbidden
use.
Panicle,
65,
section
9.
The
phylidia
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
65,
section,
nine
point:
two
dimensional
regulation,
the
location
on
the
main
entrance
may
mean
that
just
for
the
record,
please
John.
BU
X
J
A
I
AJ
A
A
BI
D
Occupancy
by
changing
from
a
single-family
to
a
two
family
with
two
parking
spaces
and
a
directly
rear
deck,
the
violations-
article
65
section
41,
our
street
parking-
is
insufficient,
not
equal,
65,
section
40,
165
21.5
bar
street
parking
design,
article
65
section
8,
family
dwelling
is
forbidden
nautical
65
section
9.
A
lot
width
is
insufficient
nautical
65
section
9
a
lot
frontage
is
insufficient
article
65
section
9,
the
fluid
EA
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
65
69,
the
Rio
yata,
is
insufficient.
BV
Staying
exactly
the
same,
reducing
envelope
from
the
screen,
staying
the
same
with
the
exception
of
another
entrance
added
to
the
left
of
the
current,
the
rear
parking
configuration
is
being
changed,
and
that
was
the
reason
for
the
maneuverability
violation,
which
is
no
longer
a
violation.
The
garage
will
expand
approximately.
BV
BV
The
the
yard
violations
I
believe
her
incorrect,
because
the
building
already
exists.
They
would
be
appropriate
if
it
was
a
new
building
being
erected
for
the
the
building
is
staying
from
the
exterior
anyway.
Has
it
as
they
exist,
and
there
is
a
leader
deck
being
at
it
with
just
not
working
guarding
evaluations.
The
FA
are
violation
of
decided,
I
believe
follow
correctly,
I,
believe
it
to
go
to
the
space.
A
A
BV
B
BV
BV
BV
BV
AC
AJ
Mr.
chairman
of
the
board
patrick
van
nelle,
mayor's
office,
Neighborhood
Services,
there
was
the
flutters
made
account
on
July
9th
on
the
applicant
magic,
the
Columbia
Saturno,
Civic,
Association
I
believe
two
times.
They
were
also
very
good
to
accommodate
some
of
the
concerns
regarding
the
parking
has
reflected
in
the
change
the
garage
we
like
to
go.
AQ
The
chairman
of
the
board,
my
name,
is
Peter.
What
you
come
here
with
my
mom.
She
doesn't
speak
much
English,
but
she's
she's,
a
director
butter
of
two
Avondale
Terrace.
She
lived
at
2:57,
seven
Hill,
Avenue
and
she's
huge
expressed
her
support
of
the
publication.
BB
B
BB
B
BB
Think
that
is
being
proposed.
It's
not
adequate.
The
garage
that
is
being
proposed.
Initially,
they
proposed
merely
a
tandem
parking
drawing
a
line
in
the
driveway
I
have
projected
to
that.
They
can
have
come
back
with
the
two-car
garage,
which
is
the
minimum
almost
the
minimum
size
besides
garage
for
two-car
garage,
it's
classified
more
or
less
for
a
small
car
in
a
compact
and
there's
serious
maneuverability
and
getting
that
compact
car
pin.
BB
Let's
make
this
a
win-win
situation.
Mr.
Cohen,
in
the
community
meetings
indicated,
if
he's
selling
the
property
to
these
developers,
so
mr.
Cahoon
would
win
by
getting
a
higher
selling
price.
The
developer
gets
a
higher
income
stream
because
it's
to
family
I
want
to
make
it
a
win-win
for
the
win
triple
week
for
the
whole
neighborhood
I
believe
the
proper
parking
solution
would
be
to
level
the
existing
garage.
BB
The
existing
garage
is
outside
the
foundation
work
that
is
there
now,
so
they'd
have
to
take
down
to
the
side
walls
any
way
that
you
eliminate
the
garage
proposed
to
open
space
size
parking
spaces
that
can
accommodate
normal
sized
family
cars.
After
all,
it
is
three
families
in
one
unit
than
one
unit,
two
in
the
other,
so
the
I
would
propose
that
take
down
the
existing
garage
which
are
going
to
essentially
have
to
do
to
build
this
new
garage
and
create
to
a
full-size
parking
spaces
that
will
encourage
people
to
use
the
garage.
BV
Drawing
a
one-on-one
enjoys
a
site
survey
with
the
garage.
The
proposed
garage
is
20
feet,
six
inches
a
full-size
parking
space
is
8
feet,
6,
inches
symptoms,
17
feet.
We
required
four
to
two
full-size
market
spaces,
not
a
contacts
base.
Necessarily
the
I
think
the
garage
is
perfectly
adequate
for
two
cars
and
just
anything
to
do
what
is
by
demonstration
of
majority
of
the
buildings
on
the
street
are
multi-families.
BV
J
I
D
Following
this
case,
calling
boa
eight
five,
nine
seven
one,
seven
twelve,
forty
six
to
twelve
fifty
Massachusetts
Avenue
Dorchester
Brewing
Company,
would
like
to
add
a
partial
second
story
to
an
existing
twenty
four
thousand
square
foot
one-story
building
located
at
1250
ma
hsiao.
The
addition
will
include
approximately
4,000
fire
and
square
feet
of
outdoor
deck,
roof
deck
and
space
about
2,500
square
feet
of
space
and
indoor
structure.
The
addition
will
allow
more
assembly
space
for
dorchester
brewing
business
joy
violations.
Article
9
section
116,
C
of
a
non-conforming
use,
is
conditional
article
65,
6-2
60-37.
D
Q
So
my
name
is
Travis
Lee
from
one
of
the
owners
of
the
Rochester
Brewing
Company
we've
been
operating
for
about
two
years
now
and
we
are
a
twenty
five
thousand
foot
contract
brewing
facility
and
we
have
a
small
public
tap
room.
That's
also
in
the
building
we
make
over
70
SKUs
of
beer
that
go
as
far
as
Spain
and
Panama
country
in
South,
America
we've
been
open
for
two
years.
Q
A
Q
A
Q
I'm
back
here
because
of
the
violations
on
the
on
the
refusal
letter,
which
is
that
we,
a
beer
brewing
facility,
is
a
is
a
non-conforming
use
in
our
location
and
by
nature
of
expanding
the
project.
Even
though
our
beer
production
facility
is
not
getting
bigger,
but
the
project
is
getting
bigger,
so
we
are
expanding
or
extending
a
non-conforming
use,
which
is
beer,
production.
AZ
A
Q
AT
Q
AT
X
D
D
D
This
is
erect
a
184
room,
hotel
and
ground-floor
restaurant.
The
project
will
include
approximately
a
hundred
and
five
thousand
square
feet
of
building
area.
There
will
be
8
storeys
with
the
maximum
height
of
90
feet
if
proximately
82
parking
spaces
and
one
below
grade
level.
The
violations
article
32
section
9g
Cod
name,
an
address
for
the
record.
Please.
BQ
BQ
BQ
D
BQ
BQ
D
This
is
seeking
to
erect
a
four-story
building
with
four
residential
units
and
four
parking
spaces.
The
violations,
article
10
section,
one
limitation
of
area
of
accessory
useless
article
53,
section
8,
the
MFR
is
forbidden
in
a
two-family
sub-district
article
53,
section:
nine
excess
of
FA,
our
article
53
section,
nine,
the
maximum
allowed
stories
has
been
exceeded.
Particle
53,
section
eye
on
the
maximal
height
has
been
exceeded.
Article
53
section,
I
insufficient
to
side
yard
setback,
53,
section
56,
insufficient
parking
in
article
53,
section,
56
design,
a
maneuver,
Lee,
maneuverability
name.
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
That
was
approved
a
five-unit
directly
across
the
street
is
starting
construction.
We
tried
to
do
something
both
reasonable
and
also
could
create
market
rate
housing.
It's
got
a
one
for
one
parking
ratio
is
a
condominium
project
just
to
go
over
each
floor.
The
first
floor
is
an
eight
hundred
and
forty
square
foot,
two
bedroom
one
and
a
half
bath.
One
second
and
third
floor.
The
900
square
feet,
two
thousand
one
and
a
half
bath
with
back
rear
decks
and
then.
AC
AS
AM
AS
AS
BK
In
chairman
and
members
of
the
ball
kisses
Garcia
with
the
officer
Neighborhood
Services,
we
would
like
to
go
in
record
in
support
for
this
project
the
applicant
they
present
we
cause
to
abolish
meeting
for
this
proposal.
They
present
the
updates
and
the
second
a
odorous
meeting.
They
reduce
the
size
of
the
building.
Also
they
put
a
the
front
of
the
the
top
of
the
building
and
also
they
reduce
the
number
of
the
bedrooms.
BK
Based
on
the
changes
we
would
like
to
do
for
this
project,
just
I
would
like
to
mention
a.
There
are
some
concerns
from
their
bodies
from
the
right
side.
The
left
side,
I'm,
sorry
and
I
would
like
to
make
sure
that
they
continue
working
with
with
the
with
the
bodice
and
and
address
the
concerns
from
this.
BL
Afternoon
mr.
chair
members
of
the
board
Ricardo
patron
from
councillor
Lydia
Edwards
office,
the
council
would
also
like
to
go
on
record
in
support
of
this
project.
For
the
same
reasons,
she
would
like
to
ask
that
the
proponent
go
back
to
the
Harborview
Neighborhood
Association
to
present
the
the
most
recent
renderings
to
the
Association.
BM
Good
afternoon,
mr.
chairman
and
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
Emma
Fraser
and
I
live
at
56
Byron
Street
directly
above
the
proposed
project.
I
want
to
start
off
by
saying
that
the
developer
for
this
project
also
built
our
home,
so
we
know
how
he
does
business
shortly.
After
purchasing
our
unit,
we
learned
that
the
plumbing
was
done
illegally
and
in
blatant
disregard
to
code.
Multiple
raw
sewage
floods
in
our
unit
cost
us
thousands
of
dollars
to
clean
up
and
render
half
of
our
unit
unusable
for
four
months.
BM
When
the
project
next
door
began,
it
became
obvious
that
our
experience
with
the
developer
was
as
part
of
how
he
operates
shortly
before
the
Neighborhood
Association
voted
on
the
project.
Multiple
neighbors
came
to
us
with
alarming
concerns.
An
associate
of
the
developer
had
gone
door-to-door,
claiming
that
if
this
project
was
not
approved,
the
city
would
be
building
instead,
a
halfway
house
for
recovering
addicts.
Another
neighbor
said
the
associate
also
claimed
that
public
park
prep
public
parking
would
be
available
on
that
lot.
BA
BM
Is
so
far
proven
that
they
have
no
moral
regard
for
how
their
projects
affect
others?
They
are
just
scare
tactics
and
empty
promises
in
place
of
honest
collaboration
with
the
gutters.
We
want
a
building
next
door.
All
we're
asking
the
developer
come
to
us
to
begin
an
open
and
honest
conversation
so
that
we
can
come
to
a
fair
agreement
proposal
in
hopes
that
the
developer
will
be
compelled
to
work
with
us.
C
BX
D
BX
I'm
against
these
variants
is
being
asked
for
specifically
constructing
two
feet
from
my
property
line,
rather
than
the
seven
required
I
know
from
personal
professional
experience.
The
risk
of
fire
spread
an
extension
from
one
dwelling
to
another.
The
distance
is
arguably
imminent
in
the
event
of
a
fire.
It's
also
worth
knowing
these
properties
are
located.
Atop
a
hill
and
Chelsea
river,
where
we
experience
heavy
winds,
which
is
a
serious
factor
when
dealing
with
fire
and
other
hazards,
especially
if
the
building
is
under
construction.
BX
Additionally,
allowing
them
to
build
a
four
family
unit
rather
than
the
two
it
zone.
Four
raises
these
risks.
Many
of
the
fires
occurring
in
the
city
happened
by
improper
disposal
of
smoking,
materials,
kitchen
fires
and
outdoor
grills.
Each
of
these
risks
are
greatly
increased
by
allowing
multiple
you
incent,
a
single
dwelling.
Mr.
chairman
members
of
the
board,
I
only
asked
you
enforce
these
codes,
not
only
for
the
quality
of
living,
fighting
the
interest
of
life
and
safety.
Thank
you.
BY
Good
afternoon
my
name
is
Lisa
Ditullio
and
I
am
an
owner
at
fifty-six
byron
street
number
two
and
a
directed
butter
of
this
project.
I
am
not
supportive
of
the
proposal.
One
of
our
primary
concerns
is
that
we
have
not
been
engaged
in
a
constructive
discussion
about
this
project
and
none
of
our
concerns
have
been
addressed
in
the
last
zoning
board
meeting
that
we
attended
on
august
28th.
BY
B
AQ
AR
Building
next
door,
but
that
the
proposed
variances
are
far
from
equitable
to
us
at
fifty-six
Vine
Street,
as
director
butters
we're
open
to
working
with
the
developer,
to
create
a
proposal
that
is
fair
to
both
parties
and
which
we
would
support
before
the
sport.
Lastly,
I'd
like
it
to
go
on
record
that
before
becoming
a
Boston
firefighter
Steve
served
six
years
in
the
Marine
Corps
and
I
served
in
the
Massachusetts
Army
National
Guard.
We
don't
complain
about
things
that
don't
matter
in
his
fellow-servants
of
the
city
of
Boston
in
the
state
of
Massachusetts.
AS
AS
AS
AS
Like
I
said
at
60,
they
had
similar
concerns.
We
were
able
to
not
only
get
that
withdrawn
any
opposition
when
we
were
actually
able
to
get
support
for
the
project
to
the
fire
code.
This
building
meets
all
the
fire
code
standards
and
it
will
be
sprinkler,
I'm,
not
sure
about
the
fire
issues
and
then
the
two-foot
side
setback.
It
is
two
feet,
but
on
the
other
side
of
their
building,
where
there's
an
existing
three
families
also.
A
AS
J
A
J
D
J
BK
AS
A
A
D
BQ
AV
BQ
As
a
violation,
specifically,
the
provision
on
at
issue
was
article
66
table
8,
footnote
5.
That
provision
says
that
within
any
lot
fronting
Boylston
Street,
the
setback
shall
be
15
feet
here.
The
project
doesn't
need
that
15
feet.
Setback
requirement
in
our
statement
submitted
in
support
of
our
appeal
and
exhibit
the
last
page
of
exhibit
a
it
shows
that
the
setback
for
the
building
for
boils
from
the
lot
line
of
Olsen.
BQ
Street
is
13
feet,
10
inches
on
the
ground
floor
and
only
seven
foot
6
inches
on
floors,
2
through
8
accordingly
hid
violates
the
plain
language
of
this
setback.
Rapidity
article
66
table,
footnote
5.
What
the
ISD
approved
it
based
on
was
a
argument
by
the
developer
that
for
some
reason
in
this
particular
instance
for
this
particular
project,
the
front
yard
setback
should
be
measured
from
the
curb
line
of
oil
stone
street,
as
opposed
to
the
lot.
C
BW
BQ
BQ
BQ
The
only
way
that
15
feet
can
be
measured
within
the
lot
is
to
measure
it
from
the
lot
line,
not
the
current
second,
what
the
developers
relied
upon
it's
the
second
sentence
of
this
article
66th,
a
belief,
footnote,
5
I'll,
read
that
it
says
poriyal
or
bay
windows
may
extend
up
to
5
feet
from
the
street
wall
plane
into
the
area.
Is
such
a
setback
from
oil
stone
street,
provided
that
such
windows
do
not
occupy
more
than
40%
of
the
street
wall?
Claim
what
the
developers
argument,
because
this.
BQ
BQ
Nowhere
in
our
diverse
and
foremost,
the
setback
version
does
not
say
anything
about
curved
line
and
as
typically
front-yard
setbacks
are
measured
from
the
lot
line
and
not
from
the
curb
line.
So
if
there
was
a
the
drafters
of
article
66
had
intended
to
make
a
specific
exception
here
from
the
general
rule
that
a
front
yard
setback
should
be
from
the
lock
point.
BE
BQ
BQ
Of
this
provision
ignores
the
definition
of
the
works
street
within
article
66.
The
definition
of
the
word
Street
with
an
article
66,
includes
the
area
of
the
street
up
to
the
curb,
and
it
also
includes
the
additional
area
of
the
sidewalk
that
run
along
that
runs
along
the
street,
and
that
is
the
line
with
a
plot
line
locks.
So
if
we
are
to
is
to
accept
that
developers
interpretation,
we.
BJ
BQ
AQ
BQ
Interpretation
makes
no
sense
in
terms
of
where
this
setback
provision
appears
in
the
code.
It
appears
in
table
e
of
article
66
as
a
minimum
front-yard
requirement
and
under
the
codes
definition
of
front
yard.
It
expressly
provides
that
the
minimum,
whatever
ever
there's
a
minimum
front
yard
setback.
That
setback
is
to
be
measured
from
the
front
of
the
lot
line
and
not
from
the
curb
line.
Essentially,
it
is
essentially.
F
BE
A
A
BE
A
A
D
This
was
the
subcommittee
meeting
on
October
18th
down
at
10:10
Mass
Ave
first
case,
boa,
eight,
seven,
zero,
four,
four
nine.
Seventy
seven
Utah's
view
was
a
new
wooden
deck
that
was
approved
boa
eighty
five
one:
zero
three
zero
1183
Saratoga
Street
was
the
demo
existing
deck
and
build
a
new
deck
and
a
four
season
room.
It
was
approved
with
VP
da
Boa,
a
five
zero
six
three
three
three,
fifty
seven,
two
three
sixty
one
Hanover
Street
was
a
existing
restaurant
from
38
persons
to
forty
nine
persons
was
approved.
D
Boah
77339
to
75
a
to
275,
Sharma
Avenue
was
moved.
Take
out
the
proviso
to
this
petitioner.
Only
it
was
approved,
boa
eight,
six,
six,
four,
five
zero
one,
eleven
115
Newbury
Street
was
the
change
of
our
to
include
body
yacht
and
permanent
cosmetic.
It
was
approved,
boa
eight,
five,
seven,
six,
four,
eight
two.
Ninety
four
Newbury
Street
was
a
beauty
salon,
two
stores
of
Japanese
restaurant
with
takeout.
It
was
approved,
boa
eight,
five,
nine,
seven,
one,
seven,
twelve,
twelve,
forty
six
twelve
fifty
was
also
was
heard
today,
boa
eight
five,
four
six,
six
five.
D
Ninety
one
Glenn
Road
was
a
new
kitchen.
New
floor
was
approved
with
VP
da
Boa.
Eight
six
one
one
one,
one,
eight
nine
$33.99
to
3401
Washington
Street,
was
they
chained,
bought
a
yacht
established
a
tattoo
studio
was
a
food
with
VP
da
Boa,
eight
eight
one,
three
seven
one
to
ever
deal
Terrace
was
heard
today
boa
a
five
seven.
D
Four
three
three
10:47
Blue
Hill
Avenue
was
deferred
till
twelve
eleven
boa
eight
six,
five,
five
zero
two
one
1194
till
1206
Blue
Hill
Avenue,
was
he
change
that
provides
them
from
from
one
petitioner
was
approved,
the
BPD
a
boa
eight
seven,
five,
five
six
five,
twenty
eight
Roslin
Street
had
a
dorm.
It
was
approved.
D
Boa
five:
nine
six,
three
three
to
eighteen,
Fairmont
Street.
It
was
proposed
to
construct
two
one
addition:
a
half
story.
Sixteen
by
twenty
five
addition:
it
was
approved
at
BPD,
a
boa
for
seven
six.
Six,
seven
eight
fee
of
you
was
at
a
portion
of
the
basin,
his
living
area
at
the
unit,
one
it
was
approved,
boa
eight,
six,
zero,
seven
three
0:38
mill
street
was
a
demo.
An
existing
install,
a
new
deck
was
approved,
boa
eight
five,
seven
zero
six,
three
forty
eight
Newburgh
Street
was
extracting
new
DOMA.
D
BZ
Good
afternoon,
mr.
chairman
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
Tim,
sir
Winsky
I'm,
the
BPD,
a
project
manager
for
this
project.
I
apologize
for
the
confusion
here.
This
project
is
still
undergoing
article
80
review,
and
it's
it's
it's
our
preference
that
that
this
approval,
4G
Cod,
come
after
article
ii
review.
So
if
it's
possible
to
sort
of
defer
this
until
you
hear
from
us.