►
From YouTube: Zoning Board of Appeal Hearings 11-15-22
Description
Zoning regulates the use and dimensional boundaries of privately owned buildings and land. The Zoning code is in place to protect the neighborhoods from the construction of buildings or structures that do not fit into the context of a neighborhood. The Zoning Board of Appeal hears appeals for varying the application of the Zoning Code and determines when it is appropriate to grant deviations from code restrictions.
A
A
The
city
of
Boston
Zoning
Board
of
appeal
hearing
for
November
15th,
is
now
in
session.
This
hearing
is
being
conducted
in
accordance
with
the
applicable
provisions
of
the
open
meeting
law,
including
the
updated
Provisions
enacted
by
the
legislature.
Regarding
virtual
hearings,
the
new
law
allows
the
board
to
continue
its
practice
of
holding
virtual
hearings
through
March
2023..
A
A
The
information
for
connecting
to
this
hearing
is
listed
on
today's
hearing
agenda,
which
is
posted
on
the
Public
Notices
page
of
the
city's
website.
Boston.Gov
members
of
the
public
will
enter
the
virtual
hearing
as
attendees,
which
means
you
will
not
see
yourself
on
the
screen
and
you
will
be
muted
throughout
unless
administratively
unmuted
and
when
asked
to
comment
board
members,
applicants
and
their
attorneys
and
representatives
will
participate
in
the
hearing
as
panelists
and
they
will
appear
alongside
the
presentation
materials
when
speaking
panelists
are
strongly
encouraged
to
keep
video
on
while
presenting
to
the
board.
A
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
comment
and
the
time
for
commenting
as
time
constraints
require
that
reason.
The
board
prefers
to
hear
from
members
of
the
public
were
most
impacted
by
a
project.
That
is
those
individuals
who
live
closest
to
the
project.
A
A
If
you
are
connected
to
the
hearing
by
telephone,
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.
Those
called
upon
the
comment
will
be
asked
to
State
their
name
and
address
first
before
they
provide
a
comment
in
the
interest
of
time
and
to
ensure
that
you
have
enough
time
to
do
so.
Please
raise
your
hand
as
soon
as
missed
a
fortune
raise
the
address
into
the
record.
A
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
may
be
repeated
throughout
the
hearing.
Today's
Board
of
good
news
consists
of
seven
members
of
full
board,
and
so
I
will
now
take
a
roll
call
of
the
Italian
board
members
Mr
Fortune
good
morning,
Mr
champ
good
morning,
Miss
dong.
A
And
Mr
Hampton
from
the
bpda
good
morning,
Mr
chair,
okay,
just
for
those
in
the
public.
Typically,
the
bpda
provides
us
with
written
commentary
on
their
views
of
the
projects
that
unable
to
do
so
so
I
will
be
asking
Mr
Hampton
on
a
regular
basis
to
to
weigh
in
having
said
that,
Mr.
C
E
A
Fortune,
yes,
Miss
finato!
Yes,
hang
on
a
second
I
I
apologize,
Miss
Dawn,
yes,
Ms
Baraza!
Yes,
all
right,
Miss,
Love,.
F
A
Mr
agero,
yes,
and
I
too,
am
in
favor
of
the
motion
passes.
E
G
Good
morning,
Mr
chair
members
of
the
board
Attorney
John
belgiani,
on
behalf
of
the
applicant
on
36,
to
40
Sprague
Street.
Thank.
E
You
Council
regards
to
36
to
40
to
3840
Sprague
Street
the
board
originally
granted
this
really
on
April
30th
of
2020
and
the
board
granted
the
first
extension
of
the
relief
until
April
30th
of
2023.
Cova
Towing
does
not
apply
to
this
relief.
The
applicant
is
now
seeking
an
additional
one-year
extension
until
April
30th
of
2024..
E
The
applicant
has
come
before
the
board
seeking
an
extension
earlier
than
usual
because
their
investors
do
not
want
to
move
forward
with
the
project
with
only
six
months
remaining
on
the
relief
I
recommend
that
the
board
carefully
consider
the
request
and
Grant
an
additional
one-year
extension.
If
the
applicant
advances
a
convincing
reason
for
granting
an
early
extension
Miss
panado.
Would
you
like
to
say
something
on
this
I
believe
you
have
some
expertise
in
this
field.
H
Yeah
I
we're
finding
in
the
capital
officers
are
very
cautious
these
days.
A
lot
of
them
are
saying
pencils
down
at
the
moment,
given
the
fluctuation
and
interest
rates
which
is
making
deals
very
difficult
to
pencil
out
these
days,
so
it's
not
surprising
that
an
investor
might
pull
out
or
the
proponent
might
be
looking
for
new
debt
or
Equity
partners.
I
I
J
K
L
Good
morning,
Mr
chairman
members
of
the
board,
Richard
Lynn's
business,
address
245
Sumner,
Street,
East
Boston
on
behalf
of
the
petitioner
Cecilia
Maya.
Thank.
E
You
Council
regarding
806
Saratoga
in
96,
Wordsworth
Street,
the
board
originally
granted
this
release
on
November
6th
of
2018..
The
board
has
since
granted
two
extensions
of
relief.
The
second
extension
until
November
6
2022,
encompassed
all
applicable
tolling.
The
applicant
is
now
seeking
its
third
one-year
extension
until
November
6th
of
2023.
I
recommend
that
the
board
grant
that
extension,
if
it
finds
it
appropriate
under
the
circumstances.
H
A
E
D
Don
stefanov
addressed
the
423
U.S
Broadway
South
Boston
The
Architects
on
these
townhouses
I,
come
before
you
to
ask
that
we,
the
building
department,
has
asked
me
to
link
the
decisions
to
of
my
eventual
arrangement
of
these
buildings.
I
have
two
townhouses
a
four
unit
and
a
five
unit
through
the
development
of
this
project.
Over
the
years,
we've
introduced
a
23
fire
lane
on
one
side
and
they're
unbeknownst.
To
me,
there
was
a
large
sewer
main
on
the
other.
D
D
D
So
what
I'd
like
to
do-
and
what
ISD
has
asked
me
to
do-
is
rearrange
the
vzc
numbers
to
correlate
directly
with
the
permit
number
so
583,
which
is
the
first
sequence,
number
would
be
on
the
street,
and
that
would
be
the
five
units
and
585
unit
behind.
It
would
be
a
four
units
because
that's
what
fits
on
my
lot,
but
that's
not
the
way
it
was
originally
approved.
D
A
O
P
P
P
D
Q
P
A
C
E
R
So,
basically,
we
came
to
a
settlement
agreement
where
we
reduced
the
height
of
our
building.
The
nine
units
to
three
stories.
Seven
units
and
the
youth
Enrichment
Services
project
was
reduced
by
six
feet
from
45
to
39
feet
and
the
neighbors
agreed
to
you
know
back
off.
If
we
did
this
and
they
would
no
longer
challenge
so
we're
back
at
board
final
Arbiter
to
approve
the
new
version,
there's
no
additional
variances,
it's
just
shorter.
A
So,
with
these
changes
in
height,
do
you
no
longer
need
a
height
or
story
variance?
Are
you
within
within
the
zoning
code.
R
A
A
Okay,
do
we
have
a
copy
of
that
or
are
we?
Is
that
something
that's
a
matter
of
public
record.
S
Yeah
we
are
at
the
cities
of
partying
through
the
settlement,
so
it's
part
of
all
these
kinds
of
appeals,
so
we'll
probably
copy
when
it's
finalized.
P
I'm
sure
I
did
look
at
look
at
seems
to
work
more
in
context.
It's
fine.
H
E
T
U
V
E
U
I
have
Mr
chairman
everything
looks
good.
We
have
lettuce
from
the
applicant.
J
H
H
X
A
E
Next
case,
with
building
code
case,
boa
139
83817,
Lewisburg
Square.
This
is
an
amended
scope
to
include
roof
work,
stairs
Skylight,
roof
access
to
a
hatch.
The
violations
of
ninth
Edition
780
CMR
1011,
stairways,
1011.1
2.2
roof
access
where
a
Stairway
is
provided
to
a
roof.
Access
to
their
roof
shall
be
provided
through
a
penthouse
complying
with
115.2
hatch,
provided
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
Z
There
we
go
that
works,
Doug,
Anderson,
commercial,
Construction,
Consulting
at
313,
Congress
Street
in
Boston,
representing
the
homeowner.
The
proposed
roof
hatched
is
a
powered
sliding
hatch,
as
opposed
to
a
pop-up
bubble.
Hatch
there's
a
couple
of
practical
reasons
for
this,
one
of
which,
of
course,
is
Regional
architectural
district
and
the
code
prescribed
head
house
with
a
landing
would
be
visible
from
across
Lewisburg
square
and
the
hhd
would
never
approve.
That
second
issue
that's
raised
is
with
the
what
the
code
prescribed
head
house
and
Landing.
Z
It
would
incur
two
zoning
violations,
one
of
which
is
an
increase
in
flow
area
ratio.
Of
course,
the
far
and
Beacon
Hill
was
2.0
and
all
of
these
buildings
on
Lewisburg
are
well
over
three
as
it
is,
and
the
second
issue
would
be
the
height,
because
penthouses
that
are
used
as
livable
space
are
not
excluded
from
the
height
of
the
building.
So
we
would
encourage
a
zoning
violation
of
over
65
feet,
so
the
post
Skylight
has
actually
been
enlarged
from
what
is
was
submitted
to
the
board.
It
is
now
36
inches
full,
clear
width.
Z
A
Well,
Mr
Anderson.
As
you
know,
this
board
has
always
favorite
hatches
over
penthouses
for
all
the
reasons
that
you've
already
stated
so
Miss
Barraza
have
you
had
a
chance
to
look
at
the
plants?
Yes,.
P
A
H
C
H
E
S
E
AA
A
J
A
K
E
Welcome
are
there
any
other
deferrals
in
withdrawals
to
the
9
30
cases?
Only
if
you
give
me
the
address
for
us,
please
hearing
none
I'll
call
the
first
case
calling
DOA
139-6226
15
Julie
Circle.
This
is
the
combine
two
existing
laws
in
directly
four
four
dwellings:
four
family
dwelling,
the
violations,
article
69
section
29,
Osprey,
Botkins,
insufficient
article
69,
Section,
8,
accessory
parking
uses
forbidden
article
69,
Section,
8,
a
multi-family
dwelling
view
system,
article
69,
section,
9,
the
lottery
areas,
insufficient
article
6969,
the
Floyd.
A
ratio
is
excessive.
E
AC
Morning,
Mr
chairman
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
George
morazzi
I'm,
an
attorney
with
the
business
address
of
350
West
Broadway
in
South
Boston
I
represent
Karen
McKinney,
who
is
proposing
a
new
two-story
four-unit
building
with
four
parking
spaces
at
15,
Yule
Circle,
the
zoning
sub-district,
is
one
up.
Six
thousand.
AC
The
new
proposal
is
for
a
four
unit
building
which
would
have
front
bay
windows
and
a
hip
roof
with
cloudboard
siding
and
Architectural
details.
We
see
in
other
surrounding
properties.
The
number
of
correctly
cited
zoning
violations
has
been
reduced
from
12
in
January
to
six.
With
this
current
proposal,
the
units
would
be
all
two
bedroom
two
bath
units
of
approximately
one
thousand
square
feet.
There
will
be
no
roof
decks
or
balconies.
There
will
be
approximately
2
000
square
feet
of
open
space,
landscaped
open
space
surrounding
the
building
in
the
parking
area.
AC
The
building
would
be
two
stories.
There
is,
as
I
say,
a
hip
roof
with
an
attic
with
storage
space.
Only
there
is
no
living
space
above
the
second
story
of
the
building.
The
building
is
34
and
a
half
feet
to
the
top
of
the
roof.
Zoning
height,
which
is
measured
to
the
mean
level
of
a
hip
group,
is
27
and
three
quarters
feet.
AC
There
are
five
mature
trees
on
the
site,
none
of
which
will
need
to
be
removed,
and
they
are
noted
on
the
site
landscape
plan.
The
zoning
refusal
letter
lists
seven
violations.
This
there's
a
forbidden
use
since
this
area
has
single
families
owning
the
four
unit.
Use
requires
a
variance
there's
a
citation
for
insufficient
off-street
parking.
The
zoning
code
here
requires
two
phases
per
unit.
One
space
per
unit
is
being
proposed
in
order
to
preserve
site
usable,
open
space.
AC
AC
The
zoning
refusal
at
a
cites,
a
violation
for
excessive
Building
height,
which
I
contend,
is
a
citation
made.
An
error.
The
maximum
Building
height
under
the
code
is
two
and
a
half
stories
and
35
feet.
This
building
is
a
two-story
building,
even
if
the
attic
level
were
considered
a
half
story,
but
it's
not
because
there's
no
living
space
there.
This
would
be
only
a
two
and
a
half
story
building
which
complies
with
the
code.
Violation
is
cited
for
insufficient
usable
open
space,
because
this
is
a
one-app
zoning
sub-district.
AC
The
code
requirement
is
1800
square
feet
of
usable
open
space
per
unit.
The
proposed
open
space
here
is
still
substantial
at
just
over
2
000
square
feet
total
for
the
four
units.
Finally,
this
citation
for
insufficient
front
yard
setback,
the
required
front
yard
setback
is
25
feet
opposite
back.
Here
is
nine
feet
to
the
building
face
and
just
about
eight
and
a
half
feet
to
the
front
of
those
forward.
Fronting
forward-facing
Bays
down
Mr
chairman
I'll
pause
and
take
any
questions
that
members
may
have.
A
A
And
can
we
go
to
the
the
site
plan,
you
said,
there's
a
pretty
big
discrepancy
between
the
on
the
front
yard,
setback
between
what
is
required,
and
what
is
being
posed
is
is
that
modal,
or
is
that
me
why?
Why
is
it
such
a
big
discrepancy.
AC
Yes,
I'm
sorry
I
was
muted
if
we
scroll
down
a
little
bit
more
on
this
page.
That
would
give
you
a
night.
Oh
okay,
I
thought
the
assessing
map
might
be
there,
the
there's
an
existing.
It's
it's,
not
quite
modal.
It's
an
existing
garage
structure
on
the
on
on
the
the
the
front
of
the
site
as
we're
facing
it,
except
the
building
just
for
the
boys
reference
when
this
was
here
in
January
the
board.
The
building
was
facing
the
other
side
of
the
site,
the
other
side
of
yule
Circle.
AC
It's
been
brought
around
to
as
we
look
at
this
plan,
the
right
side,
the
required
front
yard
setback
is
not
being
met,
but
the
provided
setback
is
not
really
inconsistent.
AC
There
are
only
a
couple
of
other
buildings
on
this
side
of
yule
Circle
and
the
reason
why
that
setback
there
is
provided
aside
from
allowing
for
decent
size
units
with
surrounding
yard
space
is
to
allow
for
those
four
parking
spaces
in
the
rear
of
the
site
which
are
accessed
by
the
opposite
side
of
yule
Circle,
one
of
which
is
an
ADA
compliance
space
which
again
further
pushes
that
building
just
a
little
bit
towards
the
front
of
the
site.
AC
It
was
I,
don't
recall,
I,
I,
I
I,
don't
recall,
Mr,
chairman
I,
I,
I'm,
sorry
I,
just
don't
recall.
A
Okay,
well
I
I,
don't
know
if
Mr
Mr
Broome
knows
because
if
it
was
denial
would
be
a
year
before
you
could
come
back.
Rick.
AC
Well,
it's
a
substantial
it's
a
different
application.
It's
a
four
unit
application
in
a
different
building
with
half
as
many
violations,
so
there's
no
prohibition
on
returning
within
12
months,
even
if
it
were
straight
denial.
A
Okay
and
you've
got
four
parking
spaces,
one
for
each
unit,
I
that
that's
how
they're
set
up.
AC
Yes,
that's
correct
four
spaces,
one
for
each
unit
and
they
will
run
with
the
with
the
unit
and
with
the
leases.
A
Okay
and
again,
I
didn't
really
take
a
look
at
the
Google
Maps
or
anything.
This
is
a
single
family
District.
What
what
are
the
neighboring
buildings
composed
of.
AC
So
in
this
immediate
area,
just
for
example,
seven
to
nine
Yule
is
a
two
family
206
Neponset
Avenue,
which
is
on
the
corner
of
Ewell,
is
a
seven
family
two-0.
Next
to
that,
I
think
it's
another
seven
family
17
Yule
circle
is
a
three
family
of
fourteen
Neponset
Valley
Parkway,
which
is
on
the
corner
of
Ewell
and
and
and
the
Ponce
Valley
Parkway
is
a
commercial
building.
A
A
The
board
is
anyone
here
to
testify,
offer
testimony
on
this
project.
AE
Good
morning
Mr
chair
members
of
the
board,
this
is
Danielle
Fonseca,
with
the
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood
Services
I
host.
Another
Butters
meeting
for
this
proposal
on
September
21st,
where
Butters
did
con
address,
concerns
for
parking
wanting,
affordable
apartments
for
the
area,
the
amount
of
units
and
project
being
proposed
in
the
Reedville
area
and
the
density
they
feel
it
could
create.
Along
with
traffic,
the
applicants
did
meet
with
the
reveal
watch
neighborhood
group
in
September.
There
were
some
feelings
that
the
project
should
be
a
single
family
or
a
duplex.
AE
AF
S
Y
Do
we
have
two
race
stands
here,
open
it
up
for
Heidi
and
then
Jackie
Heidi?
Can
you
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record?
Please
can
you
hear
me
yes,.
AG
If
I
heard
it
right,
it's
one
parking
space
per
unit
and
as
it
is,
monstering
is
a
small
cul-de-sac
and
there's
people
on
your
circle
that
are
parking
on
my
street
because
there's
not
sufficient
parking
already
on
your
circle.
It's
a
small
half
circle
street,
but
they're
trying
to
pack
all
these
multiple
dwellings
in
there
and
there
is
not
sufficient
parking.
The
one
they
just
built
in
the
corner
is
basically
in
the
front
yard
and
almost
right
on
the
sidewalk
I.
Don't
even
have
that
got
zoned
so.
AG
Y
I
My
name
is
Jacqueline
Jones
and
I
live
on
the
first
quarter
of
the
block
of
Hamilton
Street
and
I
am
also
in
opposition
of
this
property.
That
Community
is
already
very
densely
developed
and
already
their
residents
from
Neponset
Valley
Parkway
that
Park
on
Hamilton
Street
and
if
there's
only
one
parking
spot
per
unit.
The
likelihood
that
they're
also
going
to
be
parking
on
the
other
residential
streets
of
that
neighborhood,
which
is
going
to
create
more
traffic
in
that
close
proximity.
G
Good
morning,
Mr
chairman
members
of
the
board,
John
palgini
I
own,
the
property
located
at
214,
Neponset
Valley
Parkway.
It's
a
law
office
with
two
apartments
above
it
and
I
want
to
go
on
in
support
of
this
project.
I
think
where
it's
located,
you
have
Walcott
Square,
which
has
construction
yards
in
the
middle
of
the
square,
which
is
very
unsightly
for
a
square
like
that
and
I
think
the
residential
would
be
a
marketable
upgrade
of
what's
existing.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
No.
A
Can
I
have
a
motion,
please
Mr,
Mr
Hampton?
Did
the
VPD
have
a
position
on
this.
AI
Thank
you,
Mr
chair
members
of
the
board,
Chef
Hampton
bpda.
Our
draft
recommendation
for
this
is
approval
with
design
review.
Our
original
recommendation
back
in
January
for
the
six
units
was
for
denial,
but
with
the
new
plans
in
the
reduction
in
zoning
violations,
we'd
like
to
go
on
record
in
support
with
design
review.
Thank
you
can.
A
H
H
E
Following
the
next
four
cases,
calling
boa
one
two
four
eight
eight
five,
two
to
four
Colchester
Street.
There
are
three
companion
cases
case,
boa
one:
two,
four,
eight
eight
eight
one,
one:
two:
three
Forestville
Road
hboa
124-88-78-2485
to
247
to
Ponce
Valley
Parkway
in
case
boa
124,
8876
241
to
243
the
ponson
Valley
Parkway
I'm,
going
to
do
two
to
four
Colchester
and
one
to
three
fours
bill
because
they're,
obviously
the
same
purpose
all
over
the
same
purpose.
E
But
the
violations
for
the
first
two
are
the
Stanford
I'm
just
going
to
read
one
until
the
record
and
then
go
to
the
Forestville
in
the
ponson.
This
is
erected
two,
a
new
two
family
house.
As
per
the
plans
of
one
of
four
new
two
family
houses
erected
on
one
lot:
violations:
article
68,
Section,
8,
the
two
family
dwellings
forbidden
article
29,
section
4.
This
is
in
the
green
belt
protection
overlay,
District,
article
69
69.
E
This
is
the
one
to
three
four
scale:
direct
the
new
two
family
house.
As
for
one
of
four
four
families
to
be
reckoned
on
one
lot,
this
is
for
a
245
247,
the
Ponce
Valley
Parkway
direct,
a
new
two-family
house.
As
one
of
four
two
family
houses.
The
violations
article
is
69
section
9.
The
number
of
allowed
stories
has
been
exceeded.
Article
69
69,
the
lot
witness
insufficient
article
69
69
lot
with
Frontage
is
insufficient.
E
Article
69
69
excessive
far
article
69
section
9
insufficient
Open
Space,
six,
article
69,
69
inspection,
side,
yard
setback,
article
69,
section,
30.1,
the
building
alignment,
Conformity
article
69,
60
30.4
corner
lot;
provision
article
29,
section
4.
This
is
in
the
g-pod
article
69
section,
30,
two
more
dwellings
on
the
same
lot
and
article
69
Section
8,
two
families
forbidden
conferences
for
241
to
243,
the
Quonset
Valley
Parkway,
directly
new
to
family
as
one
of
four
houses,
the
violations,
article
69
section
9.
E
The
number
of
allowed
stories
has
been
exceeded:
article
69,
69,
insufficient
side,
job
setback,
article
69,
6
and
27
screening
and
buffering
article
69,
section
30.1,
the
building,
Alliance
deformity
article
69
30.12,
two
or
more
dwellings.
On
the
same
lot,
article
69
60
30.4
a
corner
lot
provision
article
29,
section
4:
this
is
a
g-pod
article,
69
Section
8.
The
use
is
forbidden
in
the
residential
district
article
69
Section
8
accessory
parking
uses
forbidden
article
69,
section
9.
The
lot
width
is
insufficient.
E
AC
Morning,
Mr
chairman
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
George
Morenci
I'm,
an
attorney
with
the
business
address
at
350,
West
Broadway
in
South
Boston
I
represent
Owen
Barry,
the
applicant
and
developer
Mr
chair
members.
These
are
four
related
applications
pertaining
to
a
combined
lot
of
approximately
25
183
square
feet
with
the
present
street
address
of
247
Neponset
Valley
Parkway
like
the
previous
matter.
The
zoning
sub-district
here
is
one
F.
AC
Six
thousand
proposal
is
for
four
two
unit:
townhouse
style
buildings,
utilizing
a
shared
driveway
and
some
common
visitor
parking,
owing
to
the
fact
that
that
these
would
be
would,
if
proved
be,
condominium
units
with
the
single
Condominium
Association
and
because
the
driveway
and
interior
parking
area
would
be
common.
The
Proposal
is
for
four
buildings
on
one
lot.
AC
These
visitor
parking
spaces
and
and
driveway
are
sorry
garage
access,
but
I'll
be
located
on
the
interior
of
the
site
and
accessed
by
A
single
standard,
with
curb
cut
in
driveway
on
the
Forestdale
side,
Forestdale
roadside
of
the
site
you
own
the
parking
garage
for
each
unit.
There
will
be
eight
visitor
parking
spaces
one
for
each
unit.
None
of
these
garages
would
have
a
street-facing
garage
door.
AC
The
buildings
would
be
three
stories
but
would
present
as
two
and
a
half
story
buildings
owing
to
their
colonial
Gable
and
design,
which
is
consistent
with
the
architectural
Rhythm
of
the
neighborhood.
The
units
are
essentially
identical
from
building
to
building
consisting
of
family-sized
four
plus
bedroom
units
averaging
about
1900
square
feet
with
respect
to
zoning
relief
is
of
course
required
in
each
case
for
the
proposed
two-family
use
in
a
one-of
zoning
sub-district
and
since
the
use
is
not
allowed,
that
violation
is
repeated
for
the
accessory
parking
use
as
well.
There's
an
far
violation.
AC
The
maximum
far
here
under
zoning
is
0.5.
The
combined
far
for
all
four
buildings
and
eight
units
is
.68,
which
shows
that
the
density
level,
while
violative
zoning
is
nonetheless
quite
reasonable
in
in
a
city
facing
a
housing
shortage,
they
recited
rear
yard
setback
violations,
but
all
buildings
have
to
the
rear.
Besides
Common
parking
area.
Other
repeated
setback
violations
by
the
fact
that
each
building
and
each
unit
here
enjoys
generous
setbacks
with
a
significant
amount
amount
of
front
and
side
yard.
AC
Green
Space
I
will
point
out
Mr,
chairman
of
members,
that
there
are
several
mature
trees
populating
the
site,
and
some
of
these
would
unfortunately
need
to
be
cleared.
However,
the
site
plan
leaves
ample
room
for
new
trees
on
the
site
and,
if
approved
by
client,
would
work
cooperatively
with
the
bpda
in
the
parks
department
and
he
commits
to
a
minimum
one-to-one
replacement
on
site
of
any
trees
which
do
need
to
be
removed.
AC
A
Well,
yeah
four
times
two
is
eight
in
in
my
sense
of
the
math,
so
the
that's
I
mean
that's
a
pretty
big
jump
up
and
as
I
look
at
the
plot
plan
I,
you
know
the
open
space
that
you
described
for
the
parking
is
in
is
in
between.
If
we
can
scroll
in
the
plot
plan,
the
open
space
to
the
parking
is
in
between
the
the
the
units-
I.
Don't
there's,
there's.
P
Yeah
that
Mr
chair,
that
was
going
to
be
one
of
my
questions.
How
many
existing
trees
are
there
and
I?
Don't
think
you
can
do
a
one-to-one
replacement,
because,
based
on
your
Google
Earth,
the
whole
site
has
canopies
of
trees.
AC
I
I
understand
and
I
thought
the
same
thing
when
I
looked
at
a
Google,
Earth
view
or
a
street
view
in
spring
or
summer
and
then
I
and
if
you're
actually
on
the
site
now
or
if
you,
if
you,
if
you
change
the
date
in
the
Google
Street
View
you'll,
see
that
there
is
substantial
canopy,
but
there
are
fewer
trees,
I
think
than
that
initial
look
would
indicate
in
terms
of
the
amount
of
open
space
on
the
site,
to
allow
for
replanting
there's
approximately
6
000
square
feet
of
of
unbuilt
area,
and
that
includes
area
not
occupied
by
parking
or
drive
aisles.
AC
So
you
know
on
the
a
better,
a
better
view
might
be
sheet
a
1.0
which
is
the
second
sheet
in
in
the
deck
and
there
you
can
see
with
the
with
the
shading.
AC
A
I
mean,
if
you
just
say
this
stuff
right
there,
the
plot
plan.
It
really
looks
like
the
the
buildings
in
the
parking
take
up
like
90
and
maybe
more
of
the
lot.
AC
I'm,
not
I
I
think
if
we
could
get
to
to
shoot
a
1.0,
because
I
think
it's
until
you
see
that
sheet
and
it's
made
clear
I,
don't
know
we
keep.
If
you
keep
scrolling,
please
keep
scrolling,
keep
scrolling
not
on
the
site
plan
he's
running.
Yes,
the
next
cheese
I
believe
the
aesthetic
sheet
there,
the
the
darker
area.
There
indicates
open
space.
Those
are
not
parking
spaces
between
buildings
on
the
street,
the
parking
spaces
into
the
rear
and
are
much
smaller.
AC
So
that
gives
a
much
better
representation
of
how
much
open
space
there
actually
is.
So.
AC
That's
correct
and
I
I
have
to
admit
that
the
the
other
views
of
the
site,
the
other
side
plans,
can
be
a
bit
misleading,
which
is
why
I
wanted
to
get
to
this
sheet.
This
sheet
accurately
represents
how
much
of
the
site
is
occupied
by
buildings,
parking,
which
is
substantially
interior
to
the
site.
A
AC
P
Mr
chair
the
plans
are
adequate.
I
would
just
comment
looking
at
the
urban
pattern
of
the
nearby
vicinity,
you
have
your
typical
residential
structure.
Next
to
a
driveway,
you
have
that
topology
and
even
nearby
there's
a
cul-de-sac,
and
you
still
have
that
typology
of
a
house
and
a
driveway
next
to
the
house.
A
Okay,
all
right
any
questions
or
comments
on
the
board.
Is
there
anyone
here
to
testify
on
the
project.
AE
Good
morning
Mr
chair
members
of
the
board,
this
is
Danielle
Fonseca,
with
the
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood
Services
I,
host
Senator
Butters
meeting
for
these
projects
on
May
3rd,
where
parking
concerns
were
addressed.
Butters
wanting
the
oak
trees
that
are
on
neponsive
Valley
protected
and
kept
alive.
The
applicants
also
addressed
the
fact
that
the
units
being
proposed
would
be
an
opportunity
for
home
ownership.
New
landscaping
and
fencing
would
be
put
in
and
done
for
the
project.
The
applicants
have
also
met
with
the
Reedville
watch
neighborhood
group
twice.
AE
They
attended
the
June
neighborhood
meeting
and
then
met
with
the
group
again
in
September.
The
concerns
that
were
raised
included
the
size
of
the
project,
parking
traffic,
open
space
and
density.
These
were
addressed
by
the
applicant.
The
location
of
the
proposal
would
be
considered
as
Transit
oriented
development
with
commuter
rail,
stop
less
than
1
8
of
a
mile
away,
and
the
applicants
have
further
stated
their
desire
to
work
with
the
bpda
on
landscaping
and
open
space.
We've
received
both
letters
of
support
and
opposition
question
for
this
proposal.
AE
The
letters
of
opposition
have
been
sent
to
the
board
for
review,
and
some
of
the
concerns
have
echoed
what
the
Reedville
watch
neighborhood
group
stated.
As
many
of
those
who
attended
the
meetings
were
at
Butters
of
The
Proposal.
Additional
concerns
that
were
raised
is
that
the
project
is
inconsistent
with
the
character
of
the
neighborhood
concerns
for
removal
of
mature
tree
canopy
and
the
number
of
variances
that
are
being
sought.
AE
We
have
also
received
15
letters
of
support
that
have
been
sent
to
the
board
for
review,
and
those
have
stated
that
they
feel
the
project
will
increase
home
ownership
for
families
in
the
city
of
Boston,
as
well
as
mentioning
the
applicants
have
met
with
the
community
several
times.
At
this
time,
we
wish
to
defer
to
the
board
for
judgment.
AF
I
I
am
in
opposition
of
this
as
well,
because
again,
it's
going
to
bring
more
traffic
to
the
neighborhood,
add
to
the
already
a
lot
of
traffic
that
is
on
that
part
of
Neponset
Valley
Parkway.
Turning
off
of
those
five
streets
onto
Neponset,
Valley
Parkway,
it's
very
challenging
at
the
moment.
This
unit
is
only
going
to
add
to
that
it
doesn't
contribute
to
the
health
of
the
community.
It
brings
more
emissions
visit
because
it
brings
more
cars
to
the
that
already
close
community.
A
Thank
you
very
much,
Miss
Jones,
yeah
I
know
it
is
interesting
that
we,
these
projects
are
right
right
near
each
other.
So
even
though
they're
separate
projects,
anybody
else,
yes.
Y
Yep,
do
you
have
a
caller
send
a
request
on
you,
617-364.
Y
AJ
Good
morning,
Mr
chip,
Craig
Martin,
hey
Colchester,
I'm,
in
a
butter
to
the
young
proposal.
This
we
find
this
to
be
an
insult.
The
neighborhood.
This
is
a
large
flat
Square
parcel
not
not
close
to
a
topographical,
hardship
involved.
We
were
certain
when
this
went
in
the
market
that
something
would
come
through
as
of
right.
Instead,
this
came
through
with
I
contend,
perhaps
a
record,
certainly
in
Hyde
Park.
This
watch
comes
in
with
40
zoning
violations
on
one
parcel.
AJ
It's
just
offensive
and
I'm
glad
that
the
board
addressed
the
open
space
and
the
treat
can't
be.
It's
had
its
major
concerns
with
this
neighborhood.
Yes,
we
understand
some
trees
will
come
down,
no
matter
what
their
single
family
construction,
but
the
city
should
not
be
enabling
clear-cutting
about
to
accommodate
this,
a
single
family
and
all
all
singing
families.
We've
constructed
this
in
this
area
of
Hyde
Park,
just
recently
gone
on
the
market
for
one
million,
there's
no
financial
hardship
for
them.
Building
closely
to
code,
we've
suggested
that
it's
compromise.
AJ
How
about
reducing
it
somewhat
seem
reasonable.
The
two
duplexes
and
two
single
families
repeatedly.
We
suggested
that
that
we
haven't
heard
back
from
them.
It
seems
it
seemed
like
a
reasonable
request
for
us,
an
effort
to
preserve
some
treat,
canopy
and
quality
of
life,
and
yes,
as
the
earliest
caller
notified,
noticed
several
of
these
streets
parallel
to
Colchester
are
not
accessible
now,
often
not
in
Plaza
Valley
Parkway
con
parked
on
both
sides
and
cars.
Coming
out,
you
can't
get
in
off
the
plaza
Colchester.
AJ
Now
is
now
the
street
that
all
the
neighborhood
uses
to
access
this
whole
neighborhood
and
and
now
we're
working
that
we're
going
to
have
on-street
parking,
because
it's
development
here
and
now
it
is
a
safety
Factor
when
you
can't
get
it
on
a
deposit
because
losing
body
on
both
sides.
It's
scary,
it's
a
life
we
want
to.
We
want
to
preserve
the
harmony
of.
AK
AG
Heidi
hi
good
morning,
can
you
hear
me
yeah
so
again,
my
name
is
Heidi
Lucas
and
I
live
at
18.
Wingate
I
actually
am
in
favor
of
this
project.
I
feel
like
the
people
that
are
built.
The
builders
have
actually
listened
to
people's
comments.
Early
on
and
I
feel
like
the
developer
is
addressed
a
lot
of
these
issues
and
is
trying
to
work
with
the
community,
which
I
never
feel
like
that.
I
do
like
this.
AG
There
is
a
lot
of
like
there
is
a
lot
of
parking
and
I
like
the
fact
that
this
is
condoized,
so
you're
going
to
have
families
that
want
to
move
into
this
neighborhood
I
understand
the
preservation
of
trees.
I'm,
one
I
don't
like
to
see
things
clear-cut,
but
I
do
like
the
parking
issue,
and
if
anyone
I've
lived
in
this
neighborhood
for
20
years
and
I,
don't
mean
to
sound
offensive,
but
that
whole
lot
is
an
eyesore
to
this
community.
Y
G
Y
G
Good
morning,
Mr
chairman
members
of
the
boy
John
Paul,
Judy,
again
214
to
Ponte
Valley
Parkway
I,
would
like
to
go
on
record
support
and
Echo
what
Heidi
just
stated
the
if
you
look
at
that
lot
right
now.
It's
it's
a
disaster.
There's
a
building,
that's
located
on!
That's
like
a
shed
that
they
sell
flowers
out
of
on
Mother's
day
other
than
that
that
Lots
not
used
at
all
I.
Think
the
home
ownership
is
a
big
deal.
So
I'd
like
to
go
on
records
all.
A
A
Okay,
just
a
quick
question:
Mr
Hampton
is
your
audio
working,
I
I.
AI
Know
Mr
Hampton
yeah.
Thank
you.
Mr
chairman
members
of
the
board,
Chef
Hanson
I'm
back.
We
actually
recommended
approval
with
design
review
on
this.
Okay.
M
A
Right,
okay,
I
mean
I,
think
we've
got
enough
information
I
think
there
is
an
issue
with
with
the
the
trees
and
the
Landscaping,
but
I
would
entertain
a
motion
at
this
point.
M
I'll
make
a
motion
to
approve
with
bpda
design
review,
with
particular
attention
to
the
landscape
plan
and
plantings
and
trees
and
feed
space.
AL
A
AM
E
Thank
you
calling
your
next
two
cases
calling
DOA
135-9834-18a,
Euclid
Street,
there's
also
a
companion
case.
Boa
139
5868-18,
Euclid
Street.
This
is
for
18
a
Euclid.
This
direct,
a
new
three
family
dwelling
with
three
R3
parking:
the
violations,
article
10
Section,
1
limitation,
the
parking
area,
article
65,
section
2,
conforming,
the
existing
building
alignment,
article
65,
section,
65-14.3,
traffic
visibility
across
the
corner,
radical
65,
section,
42.7,
the
narrow
side,
job
of
the
driveway
article
65
69
lot
areas
insufficient
article
65,
section,
9
lot
width
is
insufficient.
Article
65
section
9
lot,
Frontage
is
insufficient.
E
Radical
65-6
in
the
Florida
ratio
is
excessive.
Radical
65
69
the
ability
specimen
stories,
article
6569
the
front
yard's
insufficient
article
65,
section
9,
the
side
yards,
that's
efficient,
the
nautical
65-69
the
rayon
is
insufficient
hold
on
two
seconds.
This
is
for
18
Euclid
the
conform
occupancy
as
they
want
to
confirm
Oculus
as
a
one
family
dwelling
and
subdivide
the
slot.
E
Two
loss
lot,
one
to
be
known
as
18
Euclid
and
Lot
2,
to
be
known
as
18a
Euclid
of
2692
square
feet,
the
violation,
article
10
Section
1,
the
limitation,
the
parking
area,
article
65,
section,
9,
the
lot
areas
insufficient
article
65,
section,
9
lot
width
is
insufficient.
Radical
65,
section
9
lot:
Frontage
is
insufficient.
Article
65
69,
the
fluidio
ratio
is
excessive
and
article
65
69,
the
side
yard,
is
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
Y
Second,
okay,
I'm,
just
making
you
a
panelist
once
you
accept
the
panelist
designation,
can
you
unmute
yourself.
AH
I
had
a
little
trouble
I'm
reading
myself.
Can
you
hear
me?
Yes,
okay,
I'm,
the
architect
of
representing
the
client
for
18
and
18
and
Euclid
Street,
it's
a
it's
currently.
The
lot
is:
is
a
single
family
double
locked
that
the
client
wishes
to
subdivide
into
two
and
and
providing
a
a
three
unit.
AH
What
I
did
26
Bloomfield
Street
Boston
Mass
0208?
AH
The
the
project
is
is,
is
like
I
said
it's
a
it's
a
subdivide.
It's
a
it's
a
white,
or
at
least
it's
one,
lock
one
double
lock
with
a
single
family
on
it
that
the
client
wishes
to
subdivide
into
two
blocks
and
place
a
three-family
unit
on
the
subdivided
part
of
it.
That
will
be
three
parking
spaces
provided
and
also
pocket
a
parking
space
up
that
will
remain
on
site
for
the
current
single
family.
AN
A
AN
We
can
you
scroll
up
to
the
Parkland
there's
if
you
scroll
to
the
clock
plan,
it's
scroll
down
a
little
bit
further
nope
next
one
next
year.
This
is
this:
is
the
site
plan,
there's
there's
just
an
existing
house
on
the
side
and
then
there's
a
parking
area
on
the
on
the
other
side.
Okay,
there's
no
structure
on.
A
Okay,
okay,
okay,
and
could
you
describe
now
these
these
antennas,
rentals
or
condos.
AH
The
owner
is
intending
to
keep
these
properties
currently
as
to
stay
in
the
family.
There
will
be
family
occupying
them,
so
I
guess
you
can
call
them
rental,
but
I
intended
to
be
used
by
the
family
living
next
door
in
the
existing
apartment.
A
AH
A
And,
and
where
is
the,
where
is
the
parking
that
you
described?
Yeah.
AH
There
are,
there
are
two
parking
space
and
on
on
within
Street
and
there's
there's
a
there's,
a
one
parking
space
around
European
Street.
If
you
look
at
the
site
plan,
you
will
see
that
this
is
a
corner
lot
that
was
being
provided
is
two
parking
spaces
for
Winter
Street
and
then
one
parking
space
on
the
industry.
A
AH
AH
To
get
wider
to
provide
spaces
for
two
cars,
one
that
would
one
car
one
one
space
I
will
remain
with
the
existing
property
and
one
that
will
be
attached
to
the
new
performance
structure.
A
Okay,
can
we
scroll
down
and
see
what
the
the
new
Cloud
plan
would
look
like.
AN
A
AH
A
A
A
P
Well,
what
they're,
what
they're
suggesting
is
enlarging
the
curb
Cuts,
so
there
would
be
one
parking
space
for
the
existing
single-family
house
and
then
the
other
parking
would
be
catering
to
the
three
family
house.
That's
correct!
So.
J
E
A
Right,
Mr
D'amico,
please
let
us
know
what
your
thoughts
on
the
on
the
topic.
AO
Hey
I'm
sorry
Mr,
chairman
members
of
the
board,
Paul
D'amico
BTD.
In
my
opinion,
both
applications
have
front
yard
parking,
which
is
something
that
we
don't
normally
approve.
So
I'll
leave
the
decision
up
to
the
members
of
the
board,
but
I
like
to
go
on
record
an
opposition
of
both
parking
plans.
Thank
you.
A
AO
A
All
right
and
on
the
three
family,
what
is
the
size
of
each
of
the
units
and
square
footage.
A
AH
So
so
we
designed
it
in
a
way
that
it
would
match
the
the
the
feel
of
the
stream
in
terms
of
because
you
don't
know
how
to
okay.
A
Okay,
I
definitely
am
confused
and
have
a
problem
with
the
parking,
but
everything
else
seems
fairly
straightforward.
Any.
AP
Good
morning,
Mr
chair
members
of
the
board
Eric
Jones
of
the
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood
Services,
the
applicant
for
18
Euclid
Street,
had
the
butters
meeting
on
September
12th
and
which
had
pretty
much
low
attendance
from
the
abutters.
They
met
with
the
Talbot
Norfolk
triangle,
neighbors
United,
and
they
are
in
support
of
the
project.
Ultimately,
we
received
one
letter
of
support,
which
was
from
the
neighborhood
association
and
zero
letters
of
opposition
for
this
property.
At
this
time,
the
mayor's
office
would
like
to
defer
to
the
Judgment
of
the
board
on
this
matter.
Thank
you.
AP
A
P
Is
a
chair
I
like
to
put
forward
a
motion
of
approval
with
a
Proviso
of
BP
with
two
Proviso
bpda
design
review
and
the
second
one
is
to
reduce
I'm.
Sorry,
let
me
repeat
it
again:
I
like
to
put
forward
a
motion
of
approval
with
a
Proviso
of
bpda
design
review
and
so
that
not
to
violate
the
front
part
front
yard
parking.
A
AD
H
A
E
L
Now
439
is
going
forward.
437
is
a
different
under
together
a
different
name,
and
it
was
a
notice
issue
with
the
okay.
L
Good
morning,
Mr
chair
members
of
the
board,
Richard
Lynn's
245
Summer
Street
East
Boston,
on
behalf
of
the
petitioner,
requesting
a
brief
deferral,
if
possible,
to
allow
for
re-notice
to
have
the
correct
applicant
name.
A
Well,
Mr
Lynch,
but
to
follow
up
Mr
Fortune's
question
is
439
unrelated.
L
It
it's
not
a
companion
case.
Actually,
it's
a
separate
project.
It
just
happened
to
be
next
door
to
each
other.
Okay,
all.
L
A
H
A
J
E
Yes,
unfortunately,
we're
into
the
new
year
with
the
new
board
on
131
23
at
11
30..
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank
you.
Are
there
any
other
deferrals
or
withdrawals
for
the
10
30
cases?
You
give
me
the
address
please
bearing
none
I'm
going
to
go
back
to
the
930s
calling
the
last
case:
Colony
View
a139-6102,
169,
Maverick,
Street
Mr,
director
Edition
renovate
change,
R
from
a
three
to
a
four
family
residential
with
roof
decks
violations,
article
32,
a
section
4:
that's
a
g
card
applicability.
E
Article
53,
section,
52,
root,
structure,
restriction,
article
53,
section,
56,
Osprey
packing
is
insufficient
article
27d-5.
This
is
in
East
Boston
iPod
article
53,
section
57.2,
conforming
existing
building
alignment,
article
53,
section
9
additional
areas:
insufficient
article
5369,
employee
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
53,
section
9
the
bill
that
has
accessible
stories;
article
53
section
9
the
bill
at
excessive
and
fee
medical
5369
usable
for
spaces
and
submission
article
53,
section
9,
the
side
yards
and
sufficient
and
article
53
section
9.
The
real
yacht
is
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
L
E
We
have
we
have
both
letters
as
well.
Thank
you
all.
C
A
C
L
Thank
you
Mr
chairman
now.
If
we
could
Advance
the
slide
to
slide
five,
please
I'll
give
a
quick
overview.
I
Mr
chairman.
This
is
a
pre-existing
non-conforming
structure,
although
conforming
use
located
just
outside
of
Mavericks,
where,
as
you
can
see
here
in
the
photo,
it
is
the
currently
the
bookend
of
a
series
of
row
houses
on
the
Block
between
Orleans
and
Bremen
Street
in
East
Boston.
L
If
we
advance
to
the
next
two
slides
I
believe
we
can
get
a
rendering
of
what
the
buildings
will
look
like
in
the
future.
So,
as
you
can
see
here,
what
we've
done
is
included.
What
has
been
approved
by
the
board
I
believe
the
building
to
our
right
is
a
proposed
new
multi-family
structure.
We
actually,
if
you
advance
to
the
next
slide
slide
nine
we'll
show
our
rendering
from
a
different
as
well,
and
here
is
the
approved
project
at
173,
177
Mavericks,
so
pretty
much.
L
L
Life
safety
of
the
building
and,
obviously
bringing
it
up
to
a
much
more
better
conditions
for
the
interior
of
the
building.
The
number
of
violations
that
are
cited
really
relate
directly
to
the
existing
non-conformities
that
exist
on
the
property
currently
and
because
we
are
proposing
to
add
the
addition
so
with
respect
to,
for
example,
the
rear
yard.
The
condition
already
is
is
non-conforming,
even
though
this
is
a
shallow
Rod.
We
are
within
a
few
feet
of
the
rear
property
line.
Any
addition
to
our
building
obviously
would
create
an
additional
violation.
L
Again,
the
building
below
in
the
footprint
below
is
not
being
expanded,
Beyond
its
current
current
condition,
the
unit
sizes
are
include
two
three
bedroom
and
two
two
bedroom
units.
The
three
bedroom
units
are
in
direct
response
to
comments
that
we
do
here
through
the
community
process
about
creating
unit
sizes
that
are
consistent
for
families
as
living.
They
range
anywhere
in
size
from
a
little
over
a
thousand
fifty
square
feet
up
to
about
1120
square
feet,
total
with
respect
to
the
violations,
as
I
mentioned.
L
The
use
currently
is
conforming
in
three
units
because
it
is
a
three
out
of
2000
District.
However,
we
are
proposed
to
change
to
MFR,
which
is
again
consistent
with
not
only
the
evolving
uses
along
this
particular
block,
but
in
the
area
in
general,
respect
to
the
lot
size,
2
000
square
feet
is
required.
The
pre-existing
condition
is
already
1200
square
feet,
so
any
change
in
the
building
to
add
units
would
automatically
trigger
that
violation.
We.
L
A
lot
of
Frontage
requirements
and
the
side
yard
requirements,
the
conditions
were
left
because
we
are
attached
would
be
permitted
to
be
at
zero.
There
is
as
a
as
you
can
see
here
in
the
rendering
we
are.
There
is
a
proposal
for
another
property,
a
project
to
build
up
to
the
lot
line
to
our
right.
So
again,
this
would
eliminate
any
side
grab
requirement
under
article
53.
L
Currently,
the
rear
yard
condition
is
at
about
1.2
feet
from
the
rear
property
line,
and
that
is
with
the
enclosed
look
like
enclosed
porches.
Our
proposal
would
actually
open
those
up
to
allow
for
some
outdoor
space
to
have
some
additional
outdoor
space
for
these.
For
each
of
these
units,
the
units
above
at
the
upper
level
for
units
three
and
four
would
be
by
level
units.
You
would
enter
the
third
level
and
have
an
internal
stairwell
for
opportunity.
L
L
It's
currently
at
about
2.87
we'd,
be
increasing
that
to
3.5
with
the
proposed
Edition
that
we're
adding
at
the
upper
level
height
of
our
building
would
be
at
about
42
feet,
3
inches,
and
this
would
be
a
four
story
that
is
consistent
with
the
approved
projects,
both
left
and
right,
Mr
chairman
and
also
consistent
with
plant
East
Boston's
recommendation
for
this
area,
which
would
allow
for
increased
height
and
density.
Assuming
that
the
planning
spots
and
recommendations
are
ultimately
adopted.
Last
but
not
least,
is
parking.
This
is
within
a
two-minute
walk
of
the
Maverick
T
Station.
L
This
current
condition
of
three
units
has
no
parking.
Article
53
requires
that
we're
only
obligated
to
provide
one
parking
space
for
the
additional
unit
that
is
being
proposed.
However,
I
know
that
the
board's
position,
even
if
we
could
add
parking
and
create
a
curb
cut,
would
be
to
sort
of
frown
upon
that,
because
creating
private
parking
spaces
at
the
you
know
to
the
to
the
detriment
of
the
striving
Neighbors
on
street
parking
availability
is
something
that
the
board
it's
traditionally
not
approved.
L
A
So
it
looks
like
is,
are,
are
the
buildings
to
the
left
and
right
common
developer
common
architect,
because
it
looks
like
there's
a
pretty
consistent
theme
designed.
L
No
actually
the
buildings
at
173.
If
you
want
to
jump
back
to
the
rendering
173
177
was
approved
by
this
board
about
three
years
two
to
three
years
ago.
It's
under
construction,
currently
the
property
to
the
right,
is
a
I
believe
a
different
architect
as
well.
We
do
have
Eric
zackerson,
who
is
our
project
architect,
but
certainly
yeah
I
apologize,
I,
don't
know
if
that.
AQ
A
There's
obviously,
common
themes
and
Designs
which
which
I
think
is
helpful
in
terms
of
thinking
about
the
the
design
choices
you're
making?
Is
this
in
a
flood
zone
Mr
lens?
It
is
not
okay,
but
but
there's
no
living
space
in
the
basement.
Is
there
there's.
A
All
right,
how
are
the
drawings
Mr
awesome.
AR
Yes,
good
morning,
Mr
chair
members
of
the
board.
It's
all
I've
been
answers
with
the
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood,
Services
ons
hosted
an
abutters
meeting
for
this
project
on
August
25th
of
this
year.
Only
one
of
utter
joined
the
meeting
and
about
a
butter
voice
full
support
for
this
proposal.
AR
The
applicant
also
presented
this
proposal
to
the
go
Street
citizen
associations
twice.
The
membership
voids
will
support
the
project
with
some
members
in
support
and
one
in
that
position.
Those
who
supported
believe
that
this
will
be
a
good
addition
to
the
neighborhood
and
remember
that
opposed
said.
The
proposal
was
I
quote
too
messy
irregular
and
high.
Our
office
has
received
eight
letters
in
support
for
this
project
and
at
this
time
our
office
related
to
the
judgment,
I
think
Mr.
AS
Yes,
Julius
Soko
167,
Maverick
Street
directed
by
the
I'd
like
to
say
I'm
in
support
of
this
project,
so.
A
Okay,
well,
from
my
perspective,
I
mean
Miss,
Perez
I,
don't
know
if
you
would
agree,
but
actually
having
the
same
architect
on
the
adjacent
buildings
allows
for
some
consistency
of
of
design,
which
is
welcome.
We
don't
have
this
kind
of
chopped
up.
Look
on
the
on
the
street
Escape
all.
P
A
A
J
E
Following
our
next
case
for
10
30
calling
boa
138-5144-1213-1223
Commonwealth
Avenue,
this
is
seeking
to
expand
the
restaurant
Smoking
bar
with
live
entertainment
at
1217,
a
into
an
adjacent
space
occupancy
to
remain
assembly,
A2
the
violation
article
9
section
one.
This
is
the
extension
of
a
non-conforming
use,
a
bar
with
live
entertainment
and
smoke
and
bowel
uses
of
forbidden
uses,
name
and
address
to
the
record.
Please.
AT
AT
Okay,
yes,
I'll,
be
quick,
so
this
we
are
one
of
the
few
smoking
bars
of
the
city.
As
you
know,
the
when
the
smoking
when
smoking
was
banned
in
2003
or
five
the
smoking
bars
are,
is
something
the
city
license
back
then,
but
the
zoning
code
never
got
updated
to
include
them.
So
anything
like
opening
one
or
extending
one
has
to
go
to
the
zoning
board
of
appeals,
because
it's
not
in
the
code.
Now
we
got
licensed
in
2008
2009
we
actually
expanded.
It
was
this
very
small
space.
AT
We
expanded
into
a
another
small
space
in
2013,
with
the
board
back
then,
and
and
now
we're
proposing
to
expand
into
an
adjacent
space
as
well
we're
keeping
everything
the
same.
All
we
do
is
we
have
some
live
entertainment.
Sometimes
we
don't
have
alcohol
or
any
alcoholic
license,
then
we're
not
seeking
one
and
that's
it
just
people
they
like
it.
People
come
and
relax
different
people
from
different
backgrounds.
It's
an
it's
an
ethnical
thing:
it's
it's!
AT
A
Well,
thank
you
thanks
for
the
invitation
well,
consider
me
naive
here,
but
can
you
tell
what
is
that?
What
is
what
products
are
being
smoked
in
the
smoking
bar.
AT
Yes,
so
so
mostly
it's
what
you
would
call
the
shisha
or
hookah.
So
it's
basically
tobacco,
it's
a
it's
a
middle
eastern
water,
pipe
yeah
and
it
has
different
flavors.
A
AD
A
Changing
of
the
plans
of
seating
arrangement,
anything
it's
just
it's
just
the
expansion
of
the
Forbidden
use,
correct.
AT
Well,
yeah
we're
we're
adding
so
we're
adding
so
the
area
that
we're
adding
to
we're
doing
some
for
like
rearranging
the
seating
there,
because
one
of
the
areas
we're
expanding
to
is
currently
in
another
restaurant.
So
that's
closed.
Now
we're
expanding
into
that.
So
so
we'll
be
changing
some
of
the
furniture
and
the
seating
arrangement
there.
Okay.
A
But
you're
not
doing
an
instructional
or
no
okay,
all
right.
How
are
the
plans
Miss
Baraza.
AU
Yes,
good
morning,
honorable
chair
members
of
the
board,
Frank
Mendoza,
also
Brighton
liaison
of
the
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood
Services
here
here,
to
testify
that
the
applicant
completed
their
Community
engagement
process,
no
significant
opposition
from
any
of
Butters,
and
they
also
got
a
few
letters
of
support
which
were
forwarded
to
the
board,
which
should
be
on
file.
They
also
got
a
letter
of
support
from
the
Austin
civic
association
with
the
Proviso
that
no
building
code
release
be
granted,
as
always,
I'll
defer
to
the
Judgment
of
the
board.
Thank
you
very
much.
E
AU
AL
Good
morning
Mr
chair
members
of
the
boy
Tony
desidoro,
representing
the
Austin
civic
association,
the
establishment
of
Beach
Lounge
has
been
a
a
business
that
has
been
in
operation
for
13
years
and
has
been
a
great
addition
to
our
community.
It
draws
a
very
diverse
group
and
it
is
operated
without
any
problems
and
like
any
small
business.
They
have
had
a
very
challenging
period
of
time
during
the
pandemic
and
reinvigorating
themselves,
and
the
aca's
and
strong
support
of
this
proposal.
AL
It's
about
in
most
cases
where
there's
construction-
that's
being
done!
Mr
chair
that
similar
to
the
views
of
members
of
the
board
as
well,
and
everything
that
we
would
prefer
that
no
building
code
relief
be
granted
that
everything
be
done
after
code,
so
that
that's
the
intent.
AL
AT
So
we
already
have
a
sign,
so
it
might
be
just
like
a
bit
relocated,
but
there's
no
any
there's
no
plans
for
any
additional
silence.
Okay,
so.
AT
A
All
right,
thank
you,
can
I
have
a
motion.
Please.
AI
Don't
think
it's
necessary,
the
signage
will
come
to
us
if
there's
any
change
but
I,
don't
think.
There's
any
reason
for
us
to
do
a
design
and
review
on
this.
Okay.
O
A
E
A
Let
me
interrupt
just
I
think
that
the
on
the
last
one
we
should
add
a
Proviso,
that's
for
that
bad
applicant.
Only
and
just
for
the
record.
So
sorry
Mr
Fortune
I,
just
want
to
make
that
clear.
Nope.
A
Y
You're,
on
give
me
one:
second,
let
me
just
make
you
a
panelist
once
you
accept
the
panelist's
designation,
you
just
need
to
unmute
yourself.
AW
Good
morning
my
name
is
sloven
for
400
nevenset
Avenue
I
want
to
remove
the
map
remote
to
change,
to
remove
the
Proviso
and
change
the
signage
name
to
the
new
name.
A
Okay,
so
but
the
but
the
function
and
purpose
of
the
activities
will
will
be
unchanged.
Correct,
sir
okay,
so
this
was
a
change
of
ownership,
correct,
okay,
and,
and
will
it
be
there?
Will
there
be
new
signage
for
the
yes.
A
AW
The
old
name
of
all
the
new
Navy,
the
old
name,
was
Neponset
Cafe
and
the
new
name
would
be
the
Cajun
window.
A
Okay,
thank
you,
but
there's
no
change
to
the
interior,
no
change
to
the
exterior!
No
sir
okay!
Well
then,
Mr
Ross
I
would
ask
you
how
the
plans
are,
but
I
probably
can't
Point
them
any
questions
on
the
board.
A
None!
Anyone
here
to
testify
on
the
project.
N
Yes,
good
morning,
Mr
chair
members
of
the
board
George
win
with
the
office.
The
mayor's
office,
Neighborhood
Services.
Excuse
me,
our
office
hosted
in
the
butters
meeting
for
the
proposal
on
September
28th
and
those
in
attendance
voice
support
for
the
new
restaurant.
At
this
time,
our
office
will
defer
judgment
to
the
board.
Thank
you.
Thank.
A
You
before
we
take
a
further
testimony,
let
me
ask
the
applicant:
will
there
be
takeout
at
this
restaurant
I.
AW
AW
A
All
right:
well,
if
we
approve
this,
there
will
be,
it
will
be
accompanied
by
a
series
that
provides
us
about
how
to
handle
grass
removal
on
other
issues
involving
takeout,
but
we'll
get
to
that
at
the
end,.
AD
A
Right
is
there
any
other
testimony
for
this
from
the
public?
Well,.
M
I
have
a
motion
then
emotional,
improve
with
the
following
with
the
usual
takeover
visors
and
for
this
applicant
only
all.
J
A
M
A
E
You
following
your
next
case,
calling
boa
139
5861
110r,
Lonsdale
Street.
This
is
actually
of
a
garage
to
be
used
for
home
occupation
at
110
Lonsdale
street,
with
proposed
screening
and
buffering
the
violations.
Article
65
section
39
screening
in
Buffalo,
65,
Section
8
a
home
in
the
occupation,
used
a
lot
of
Youth
regulations,
article
65,
section
9,
the
flood.
A
ratio
is
excessive
name
an
address
for
the
record.
Please.
O
A
Okay
well,
well,
this
be
it's
it's
an
office
for
use
by
the
residents
of
the
of
the
house,
the
main
house,
yes,.
AK
A
O
Work
has
been
done,
I
fell
back
during
covet
and
apparently
they,
the
person
who
had
it
on
file
left
the
office,
and
so
when
I
brought
it
up
previous
last
year
or
summer,
they
said
that
nothing
never
happened.
So
I
had
to
read
a
file.
So
that's
why
it's
taken
so
long
to
get
too
young.
Okay.
O
We
have
a
60-foot
driveway,
sir.
If
you
look
at
the
drawings,
it
will
show
you
that
we
park
up
to
five
cars
in
the
driveway
right
now.
P
A
All
right,
how
are
the
drawings,
Mr
Raza.
N
Mr
chair
members
of
the
board,
George
Schwinn
with
the
mayor's
office
Neighborhood
Services
our
office
received
letters,
support
from
the
butters
included
in
St
Mark's
area,
civic
association.
At
this
time,
our
office
would
defer
judgment
to
the
board.
Thank
you.
Mr.
E
O
O
AD
P
O
AV
E
Calling
the
next
case
calling
boa
one:
three,
eight
six,
three:
nine
seven,
eight
ruina
Street.
This
is
a
change
of
octopus,
but
two
family
to
a
three
family
convert
basement
into
a
third
unit.
The
violations
article
65
section
33,
37
Osprey
parking-
is
insufficient.
Article
65,
section
60-8
three
family
detached
dwelling,
has
been
an.
AY
Y
Can
you
raise
your
hand
if
you're
on,
for
this
case,
okay,
yep
Eric,
you've
been
unmuted.
AZ
Hello
I'm
here
with
my
brother
too,
would
you
mind
adding
him
as
a
panelist,
his
name's
Evan.
AZ
Sure
we'd
like
to
convert
the
unfinished
basement
to
a
legal
third
unit
and
finish
the
space
and
rent
it
out.
A
Can
you
show,
can
we
see
the
the
the
drawings
for
the
what's?
The
basement
is
what
you
sort
of
just
use:
your
storage,
now,
storage.
AZ
A
Okay
and
let
me
see
the
floor
plan
for
the
basement
and
then
see
the
elevation.
A
Where,
where
will
the
entrance
be
to
this
basement
unit.
AD
A
Okay,
so
I'm,
looking
at
the
at
the
house
on
on
Google
Maps
and
there's
some
steps
going
up
to
a
sort
of
a
front,
porch
and
and
then
a
main
door
you,
you
would
go
through
the
main
door
to
get
down
to
the
basement
unit
as
well.
AZ
No,
we
were
thinking
of
reducing
the
size
of
the
deck
and
adding
a
separate
entrance
door
to
the
basement
on
the
right
side.
At
the
front
of.
A
A
So
all
right,
we
have
an
issue
with
with
basement
units
that
tend
to
be
underground
and
it's
hard
to
tell
what
the
k,
what
the
situation
is
here
without
elevations.
What
is
the
Florida
ceiling
height
in
the
basement.
AQ
P
There's
not
enough
adequate
information
to
even
make
good
decisions,
so
I
would
almost
encourage
a
deferral,
so
we
can
see
adequate
drawings
like
elevations.
The
demo
plan
actually
shows
indoor
egress
stairs
leading
up
but
I
I,
so
it
it's
removed
and
there's
Wells
adjacent
to
bedrooms,
but
I'm,
not
sure
if
the
front
entry,
if
there's
enough
room
to
walk
into
this
basement
unit
from
the
front,
there's
just
not
adequate
drawings
to
make
that
assessment.
A
Okay,
so
to
the
applicant,
what
basically
units
trigger
concern
for
this
board
based
on
whether
sort
of
it
has
whether
they're
a
bad,
particularly
bedrooms
in
an
area
that
it
kind
of
feels
underground
and
in
a
dungeon-like
atmosphere?
It's
hard.
We
approve
it
on
situations
where
there's
where
the
topography
lends
itself
to
adequate
light,
but
without
drawings
that
show
the
elevations
it's
impossible
to
make
that
termination
on
our
part.
A
So
I'm
gonna
ask
someone
on
the
board
to
make
a
motion
to
fur
and
ask
you
to
come
back
with
more
complete
drawings,
so
miss
Peraza.
K
K
A
A
The
front
entry
we
need,
we
need
to
see
elevations,
front
side
and
rear
or
sections
or
both
that
show
the
the
entrance,
the
access,
the
windows,
egress
and
and
what
the
relationship
of
this
new
unit
is
to
the
grade
of
the
of
the
surrounding
lot.
A
Okay
and
the
basic
elevations
will
show
all
that
information.
It's
it's
the
architecture
that
provided
that
to
begin
with.
AV
E
AC
Good
morning,
Madam
sorry
good
morning,
Mr
chairman
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
George
morency
I'm,
an
attorney
with
the
business
address,
350
West
Broadway
in
South
Boston
I
represent
Cedarwood
Development
LLC,
which
is
to
say
David,
winick
and
David.
Mateo
site
is
363
E
Street
in
South
Austin,
and
it's
bounded
on
the
North
by
Bolton
Street
to
the
South
by
West
3rd
Street
to
the
west,
by
E
Street
into
the
west,
by
Residential
Properties
on
Bolton
in
West
3rd
Street.
AC
It
consists
of
six
Parcels
being
combined
into
an
approximately
90
9
411
square
foot
development
parcel
located
in
an
MFR
multi-family
residential
sub-district
under
article
68..
The
site
contains
the
former
rectory
and
miscellaneous
buildings
associated
with
the
former
Saint
Vincent
De
Paul
Church,
which
is
located
across
the
street.
All
structures
were
deemed
not
significant
by
the
Boston
landmarks
Commission
in
July
of
this
year
and
will
be
raised.
AC
The
proposed
project
is
a
new
four-story
residential
apartment
building
approximately
43
feet
in
height
programs
to
contain
24
apartment
units,
including
four
IDP
units
or
17
affordability
under
the
inclusionary
development
policy.
This
is
an
article
80
small
project,
which
was
approved
by
the
bra
board.
This
past
June
after
a
17-month
review
period,
which
included
two
bpda
sponsored
public
meetings
in
the
community.
AC
The
new
building,
which
would
be
lead
gold
certifiable,
would
contain
two
one-bedroom
units
of
716
square
feet:
two
I'm,
sorry,
twenty
two
bedroom
units,
ranging
from
825
to
908
square
feet
and
two
three
bedroom
units
of
1101
square
feet,
the
average
unit
size
being
895
square
feet.
Three
of
the
IDP
units
will
be
two
bedroom
units
and
the
fourth
will
be
a
three
bedroom
unit.
AC
The
building
contains
an
at-grade
24
car
garage
served
by
A
single
standard,
with
curb
cut
on
Bolton
Street
we're
an
existing
24
foot
wide
cut
will
be
reduced
in
size.
It
should
be
noted
that
there
is
no
legal
parking
on
Bolton
Street.
An
additional
approximately
14
feet
of
existing
curb
cut
on
E
Street
in
front
of
the
site
will
be
closed,
thus
restoring
at
least
one
on-site
public
parking
space.
The
site
will
be
activated
at
ground
level
by
dwelling
units
facing
E,
Street
and
West
3rd
Street.
In
response
to
concerns
expressed
during
Community
process.
AC
There
will
be
no
roof
decks
or
substantial
building
balconies
with
just
a
few
units
having
modest
insect
balconies
with
respect
to
zoning,
a
height
variance
is
soft.
The
maximum
zoning
height
here
under
Arctic
68
is
40
feet.
There
is
a
provision
in
article
68
that
for
buildings,
existing
that
are
demolish
the
existing
building
height
is
is
operative.
Here,
the
existing
building
is
approximately
30
feet.
In
height,
the
proposed
Building
height
is
approximately
43
feet.
There's
an
open
space
violation
accruing
from
the
agreement.
AC
As
I
mentioned,
the
community
requests
that
the
building
not
feature
decks
or
patios.
The
code
requires
a
2,
000
square
foot,
minimum
lot
size
here
with
a
thousand
square
feet
for
each
additional
dwelling
unit,
whereas
the
law
size
here
is
9411
square
feet,
as
I
said,
which
requires
the
variance
this
produces
an
far
of
2.76
which
exceeds
the
maximum
under
zoning
of
2.0.
AC
There
is
a
citation
on
the
refusal
letter,
which
was
read
into
the
record
for
basement
units
which
are
forbidden.
This
is
an
erroneous
citation.
The
building
contains
no
basement
units.
Two
units
are
bi-level
units
with
a
small
amount
of
living
space
below
grade.
Owing
to
the
slope
of
the
site,
one
in
the
front
and
one
in
the
rear,
both
of
these
basement
rooms
have
Windows
above
grade,
and
the
board
has
questions
about
that
later.
AC
They
are
visible
on
two
of
the
plan
sheets,
there's
a
citation
for
screening
and
buffering,
but
that
is
a
citation
that
typically
refers
to
off
street
parking
facilities,
as
I
mentioned
all
parking
spaces
here
contained
within
the
building
in
a
garage
and
that's
required
no
screening
or
buffering
there's
a
citations
across
Corner
visibility.
The
new
building
here
will
actually
constitute
an
improvement
in
this
regard
over
current
conditions.
AC
This
is
because
the
project
will
result
in
the
widening
of
all
sidewalks
adjacent
to
the
site,
with
minimum
nine
foot,
sidewalks
on
E
Street
and
East
Third
Street,
and
a
minimum
six
and
a
half
foot
sidewalk
on
Bolton
street,
where
the
present
sidewalk
is
just
over
three
feet
and
therefore
it
does
not
meet
accessibility
standards.
Finally,
there
are
site
of
violations
insufficient
off
street
parking
and
loading.
The
project
does
achieve
a
one-to-one
Osprey
parking
ratio
which
the
bpda
and
city
transportation
planners
judged
as
being
adequate
and
the
maximum
allowable
number
for
this
site.
AC
AC
A
AC
Partial
stagger
system,
the
the
garage
is
detected.
Sorry,
the
garage
is
depicted
and
can
be
viewed
on
getting
it
on
my
feet
on
sheet
a
1.1,
so
there's
a
pre-level
stacker
with
16
spaces,
and
then
there
are
eight
surface
parking
spaces,
in
other
words,
non-stack
spaces.
AC
Yeah
three
level
stacker,
which
is
frankly
the
reason
why
the
building
is
at
43
feet
in
height
rather
than
40
feet.
Typically,
you
need
about
13
feet,
at
least
in
a
garage
for
the
stacking
systems,
and
this
would
be
a
three
level.
Stacker
I
think,
which
includes
might
include
a
pet
I
shouldn't,
say:
I'm,
not
certain
about
the
stacking
system,
but
it
is
a
three
level
stacker
and
given
the
building
height.
My
assumption
is
it's.
You
know,
partially
accomplished
by
by
a
kit
in
that
location.
I
would
assume.
A
So
yeah,
okay
and
the
the
buy
level
units
with
basement
space
What.
What's
what's
the
program
in
the
the
basement
area,.
AC
They
are
shown
as
bedrooms,
but
so
if
we
go
first
just
to
show
the
actual
amount
of
space,
if
we
go
to
sorry
I'm
scrolling
on
my
own
plans-
and
they
take
a
moment
to
digitize
like
to
render
I
should
say
on
my
screen.
But
if
we
go
to
sheet
a
1.0
which
is
a
basement
level,
this
is
to
just
to
provide
these
as
two
level
units
they're,
900
square
foot,
two
bedroom
units,
and
it
would
be
helpful.
AC
Then,
if
we
look
at
sheet
because
I
know
the
board's
concerned,
certainly
based
on
the
previous
hearing
about
whether
or
not
these
are
are
underground
bedrooms.
But
you
can
see
the
windows
depicted
on
the
floor
plans.
If
we
go
to
seat
a
2.1
I'm.
P
And
then
I
didn't
see
your
stairs
in
the
alleyway
I
would
assume
that
you're
going
to
propose
that
there
should
be
stairs
as
well
on
the
site
plan.
Your
elevations.
AC
Yes,
I'm
sorry
for
the
inconsistency
okay,
but
yes
great.
P
A
Okay,
how
are
the
drawings,
Mr
Rosa.
AC
Certainly
IDP
the
IDP
policy
typically
does
not
require
Associated
off-street
parking.
There
are
24
units
and
24
spaces.
Here,
the
the
IDP
percentage
is
17
as
being
which
is
being
provided.
The
requirement
is,
the
board
knows,
is
13
the
the
fourth
unit.
The
additional
unit
being
provided
is
a
three
bedroom
unit,
and
that
was
an
accommodation
that
my
clients
were
happy
to
make
mostly
the
best
of
the
elected
officials
who
did
want
to
see
an
affordable
three-bedroom
unit.
Here.
AC
I'm
sorry,
the
the
IDP
units
are
at
you
have
to
excuse
me.
I
have
to
bring
up
the
the
board
memo.
AC
The
the
the
four
units
are
as
their
rental
units
they're,
all
at
70
percent
of
Ami,
and
this
would
translate
into
1597
for
the
two
bedroom
units
and
1789
for
the
three
bedroom
unit.
AC
Addition,
oh,
no,
no,
no
I'm!
Sorry,
no,
the
the
the
parking
is
with
the
units.
There's
no
there's
no
plan
for
additional
charge
parking.
These
parking
spaces
will
all
be.
You
know,
be
used
by
Renters
of
the
building
and
they'll
be
tied
to
the
units.
A
C
A
Questions
any
Mr
Hampton
any
comments
from
the
bpda.
AI
Said
we're
in
support
of
this
project
Mr
chair
is
this
winter
article
80,
so
continuous
design
review
would
be
our
only
ask
okay.
AO
Yes,
Mr
chairman
members
of
the
board
Bob
to
make
with
me
today.
Our
Bolton
street
is
one
way
so
when
you
leave
this
garage,
you
have
to
have
signage
Right,
Turn,
Only,.
AC
There
will
be
left
turn
only
I'm,
sorry,
yes,
yeah!
Absolutely!
We
wouldn't
want
anybody
turning
the
wrong
way,
a
Bolton,
so
they'll
probably
be
interior
garage
signage
and
if
the
city
were
able
to
locate
an
exterior
sign
on
the
opposite
corner,
that's
something
that
you
know
that
could
be
provided
as
well.
Yes,.
AO
Just
don't
make
the
curb
cut
too
narrow
only
because
it's
two-way,
if
you
have
a
car
coming
in
and
going
out,
there
might
be
a
conflict.
So
you
don't
want
it
too
narrow,
I
would
say
a
minimum
of
12
feet
should
be
that's
my
recommendation
and
finally,
the
audio
and
visual
alarm
should
be
placed
at
the
exit
Point
only
because
they're
right
at
the
the
rear
of
the
garage.
AC
I
understood
I've
taken
those
notes,
Mr,
Amigo
and
I'm
sure
Mr
Hampton
has
as
well
and
If
This
Were
to
be
approved.
It
would
be
subjected
to
continue
bpda
design,
review
and
I'll
make
sure
that
we
follow
up
on
those
issues
with
bbda
and
DTD.
Thank.
AO
A
Anyone
anyone.
K
K
Morning,
Mr
chair
members
of
the
board
I'm
Anna
white,
with
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services
at
363,
E
Street
was
a
bpda
project.
The
bpda
held
a
robust
Community
process
and
this
project
passed
their
board.
The
St
Vincent
lower
end
neighborhood
association
supported
the
project
at
this
time,
we'd
like
to
defer
judgment
to
the
board.
Thank
you
thank.
BA
BA
They
work
closely
together
on
number
of
quality
of
life
issues
and
good
faith
compromising
including
production
of
the
overall
Heights
density
and
removal
of
five
units,
increasing
the
affordable
component
to
17
percent,
implementing
a
one
to
one
parking
ratio
which
which
is
critical
due
to
the
southwestern
parking
crisis,
plus
to
filling
credit
card
for
additional
street
parking
public
realm
of
improvements
and
increasing
deciding
rear
setbacks
per
neighbor's
request.
They
also
remove
the
roof
deck
to
alleviate
concerns
from
family
in
the
area
or
like
loud
noise
in
Paris
more.
BA
However,
the
proponent
compromises
on
the
makeup
of
the
units
to
try
to
accommodate
more
Working
Families
remaining
in
the
city,
including
a
three-bedroom
IDP
unit,
Council
presidential
knowledges.
There
is
some
opposition
from
Neighbors
that
has
developed
recently.
He
respectfully
requested
a
proponent
continue
working
closely
with
the
community
about
our
sensitivity
through
from
any
quality
of
life,
issues
that
arise
during
the
construction
phase
and
thereafter.
Thank
you.
Thank.
E
You
Mr
chair
secretary
here.
We
have
nothing
but
opposition
letters
right
now
in
the
opposition
density
parking.
Obviously,
all
the
above
and
South
Boston,
okay.
Y
V
You,
my
name
is
Jeff
Rosen
and
I'm
at
o'higan
Meyer
in
Boston.
It's
a
law
firm
and
I'm.
A
lawyer
who
represents
a
number
of
Butters
Butters,
are
very
upset.
We
passed
along
what
I
have
I,
don't
represent
all
of
them,
but
150
letters.
V
Supposing
this
it's
my
understanding,
there's
been
Noah
Butters
meeting,
so
although
I
heard
that
there's
cooperation
with
the
neighborhood
I'm
not
sure
what
that
amounts
to,
because
the
butters
I
represent
are
not
aware
of
any
meetings,
there
are
so
many
variances
here
we
counted
over
12
I,
don't
need
to
read
them
again,
but
they're,
substantial,
there's,
dimensional,
varians
traffic
parking,
complete
use,
they're
just
they're,
just
very
inconvenience
yeah.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
V
Y
AY
Daniel
Conroy
with
the
law,
firm
assassin,
simroad
I
am
representing
Robert
and
and
Florida
Flaherty
I.
Will
they
act,
I
Heckle
the
comments
of
Mr,
Rosen
and
Michael,
but
I'm,
not
to
repeat
them.
I
would
I
believe
that
my
clients
are
strongly
opposed
to
the
project.
I,
don't
believe
that
Mr
Rosen
reference,
increased
traffic
and
safety
concerns
that
would
come
with
that.
That
is
part
of
the
reason
that
my
clients
are
adverse
to
it.
Thank
you.
Thanks.
BB
Hi,
my
name
is
Marie
I
live
on
Athens
Street
I'm
in
favor
of
this
project.
There's
been
quite
a
few
Community
meetings
about
this.
Regarding
this
project,
I
just
want
to
throw
my
support
part.
AC
If
I
may
interject
very
briefly,
this
is
the
attorney
George
Francis
I
did
unfortunately,
I
got
them
very
late.
I
submitted
a
support
petition
with
27
signatures,
but
I
just
received
it
this
morning
and
I
submitted
it
this
morning.
So
I
know
that
Mr,
it's
not
a
Mr
Fortune's
possession,
but
it
was
emailed
the
zda
public
input,
I
apologize
for
the
likeness,
but,
as
I
said,
I
just
got
them
today.
Thank
you.
A
J
A
C
Oh
sorry,
yes,
Mr
Rogero,.
AK
E
BC
Hello,
my
name
is
Robert
quitadamo
I'm,
the
owner
and
octane
of
a
Peter
Street
in
South.
Boston
want
to
tell
us
what
you're
proposing
yeah
I
have
an
existing
roof
decks
approximately
85
square
feet
of
functional
deck.
BC
The
the
since
the
time
of
application,
we've
done
a
re-roofing
of
the
building
and
that
deck
is
we
removed
the
deck
and
the
proposed
replacement
of
the
deck
is
for
approximately
230
square
feet,
total
150,
which
is
the
deck
area.
BC
The
existing
stairs
are
from
the
third
floor,
porch
exclusive
use
to
the
third
floor
unit,
which
is
my
unit,
and
it's
not
visible
from
the
walkway.
It's
a
similar
size
and
design
of
dexon
7,
9,
10
and
12
Peter
Street.
BC
The
existing
stairway
from
the
third
floor,
deck
direct
to
the
deck,
no
head
house
or
hatches
or
anything.
BC
If
you
look
at
the
right
side
of
this
elevation,
drawing
here,
there's
a
Stairway
that
leads
right
up
to
that
that
depth
landing
area.
Okay,.
A
Can
you
can
you
scroll
up
to
the
yeah,
keep
going
yeah?
What?
What
is
that
on
the
the
upper
right?
It
looks
like
there's
some
structure
there.
A
All
right,
so
it's
pretty
straightforward,
Miss
Barossa.
How
are
the
drawings.
A
Okay,
any
questions
on
the
board.
K
Good
morning
Mr
chair
members
of
the
board,
I'm
Anna
Anna
office
of
Neighborhood
Services
ons,
hosted
Anna
Butters
meeting
for
eight
Peter
Street
Unit
3
on
September
20th
2022,
one
attendee
expressed
support.
We
have
received
two
emails
in
support
of
The
Proposal
as
well.
The
city
Point
neighborhood
association
is
opposed
to
this
proposal.
At
this
time,
we'd
like
to
defer
judgment
to
the
board.
Thank.
BA
Morning,
Mr
chairman
members
of
Deborah
Calderon
from
Council
president
Link's
office
that
counselor
would
like
to
go
on
record
in
opposition
based
on
feedback
from
Neighbors
about
us
and
the
city
Point
neighborhood
association,
four
years
council,
president
philing
has
opposed
rules
that
proposals,
hours,
trash
removal
issues
and
their
negative
impacts
on
the
quality
of
life
for
neighbors,
Young,
Families,
Our,
seniors
and
persons
with
disabilities.
At
this
case
includes
an
expansion
of
arrows
that
council
president
Fremont
Texas
position
to
proposal
such
as
this,
along
with
the
name,
your
Thanksgiving
group.
Thank
you.
A
Anna
can
I
ask
you
a
question.
So
is
this
just
a
blanket
opposition
to
roof
decks
both
from
the
counselor's
office
and
the
city
Point
Association,
or
is
there
something
about
this
one
in
particular,.
BA
Well,
this
one
they
will
be
adding
more
space
into
that
reflect.
So
that's
something
that
we
have
concerns
about,
but
also,
obviously
we
are
opposed
to
prove
decks
due
to
the
loud
noise
and
bodies,
but
this
will
be
more
off
because
of
the
expansion.
A
A
A
Barasso,
yes,
Miss
pinata.
A
A
I'm
not
sure
about
if
someone
wants
to
make
a
motion.
They're
free.
M
C
J
J
C
F
A
I,
too,
am
in
favor
of
the
motion
to
the
high
passes,
Mr
Mr
Fortune.
We
want
to
check
on
the
1130s.
E
E
J
L
A
H
A
Rogero
I
guess
Miss
Lowe,
yes,
and
I
too
am
in
favor.
Is
there
a
date.
E
E
W
W
E
A
Fortune
after
we
do
the
last
case
at
10
30,
can
we
jump
to
the
12
o'clock.
We
hearing
we're
going
to
lose
a
member
of
the
board
and
I
think
it'd
be
useful
to
have
all
seven
as.
E
Long
as
we
reach
that
plate
two
at
12
o'clock,
okay,
okay,
calling
the
last
case
for
10
30.
calling
boa
139-1418
439
Chelsea
Street.
This
is
a
raising
existing
structure,
interactive
four-story,
residential
dwelling
with
rear
deck
and
roof
deck
exclusive
to
unit
4..
The
violation,
article
53
section
9
excessive
far
article
53
section,
9,
the
bill
and
high-
is
excessive.
In
the
sub
District
article
53
section
9
exhibition,
radio
setback,
article
53,
section,
9,
inspiration,
open
space
per
unit,
article
53,
section,
56,
Osprey
parking
is
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
L
Good
morning,
Mr
chair
members
of
the
board,
Richard
Lynn's
245
Summer
Street
East
Boston,
on
behalf
of
the
petitioner
for
439
Chelsea
Street
East
Boston
with
me,
is
Eric
zackerson,
who
is
the
product
architect?
If
we
can
jump
down
to
slide
seven,
that
will
probably
show
us
a
better
view
of
the
context.
L
Mr
chairman
this
property
is
a
single
family
structure
located
actually
in
the
neighborhood
shopping
sub
District.
It
is
literally
the
last
Residential
Building
on
Chelsea
Street,
as
you
head
towards
the
oil
Farm
heading
into
Chelsea.
Our
proposal
would
demolish
the
existing
structure
and
replace
it
with
a
new
four-unit.
Residential
dwelling
was
intended
for
home
ownership
as
it
is
located
in
the
neighborhood
shopping
district.
The
zoning
regulations
that
are
applicable
are
relatively
flexible
for
dimensional
controls.
L
Although
a
multi-family
use
would
be
permitted,
there
is
no
minimum
lot
size
required
in
the
neighborhood.
We
do
provide
2
000
Square
feet
again,
which
is
well
in
excess
of
what
is
even
required.
There's.
Likewise,
no
width
or
Frontage
requirement,
as
well
as
a
side
yard
or
front
yard
requirement.
The
only
requirement
that
appears
for
the
dimension
for
the
on
article
53
is
for
rear,
which
is
20
feet.
L
The
provisions
of
article
53
recognize
when
you
do
have
a
shallow,
lock
condition
such
as
this.
You
actually
can
reduce
the
radar
setback.
Our
rear
setback
in
this
case
ranges
from
anywhere
from
10
feet
from
the
proposed
decks
to
17
feet
from
where
the
building
is
located.
These
will
all
each
be
two
bedroom
units
generously
sized
a
little
over
1100
square
feet
from
the
smallest
ones.
Up
to
about
1200
square
feet
of
hydro
lens,
we
do
propose
to
include
a
roof
deck
that
is
accessed
by
the
rear
stairwell.
L
It
is
not
accessed
by
a
proposed
head
house
with
respect
to
the
violate
the
additional
violations
that
require
would
be.
The
Florida
ratio
which
is
permitted
at
1.0
would
be
a
proposed
2.75
height
of
our
building
is
at
42
and
a
half
feet
which
exceeds
the
limit
of
35
feet
for
the
district.
I
would
point
out
that
the
immediate
zoning,
the
zoning
District
to
our
meeting
left
is
the
maritime
economic
Reserve,
which
actually
permits
a
height
limit
of
55
feet.
L
So
we
are
on
that
border
and,
furthermore,
this
is
located
an
area
that
flooded
Boston
has
identified
for
increased
height
as
part
of
its
proposed
zoning
Amendment
for
East
Boston
last
but
not
least,
will
be
Park
Street
Parking.
The
zoning
code
currently
requires
five
spaces
for
a
new
four
unit.
Building
there
is
no
parking
currently
with
the
existing
use.
L
A
Can
we
see
I
mean
we've
seen
some
photographs,
I
apologize,
yeah.
L
But
we
want
to
jump
to
yeah
I
called
site
plan.
Is
that
page
10.?
AM
L
It's
showing
the
setback
of
the
rear
decks
as
I
mentioned.
Is
it
about
10
feet
and
then
17
feet
to
the
building
itself?
We
do
offset
our
building
from
the
left
side
step
back
to
allow
for
Windows
on
the
left
side
of
the
building
our
client,
the
prop
the
property
immediately
to
our
right
is
437
Chelsea
Street.
That
is
the
subject
of
a
separate
petition
for
a
similar
proposal.
L
The
board
will
hear
that
in
January
based
upon
the
re-notice
requirements,
so
we
want
to
jump
down
to
the
next
page
of
page
11.
showing
our
floor
plans.
These
are
all
typical,
layouts,
very
similar,
all
all
four
levels.
We
did
not
propose
this
to
be
a
bi-level
style,
where
we
then
turn
the
third
level
for
the
upper
level
units.
All
four
levels
are
pretty
similar
in
size
and
layout.
The
roof
deck
is
exclusive
to
the
upper
level
unit
form.
A
Okay,
and,
and
what
is
the
I
mean,
this
is
I,
realize
that
this
is
the
last
house
on
the
on
the
street
heading,
but
I'm
still
curious
about
neighborhood
contacts.
What
what
is
the
typical
height
of
buildings.
L
So
I
can
speak
from
both
experience
and
direct
knowledge
that
the
building
directly
behind
this
building
has
been
approved
for
a
similar
size
project
at
40
at
four
stories.
The
area
that's
in
this
particular
location
and
as
I
mentioned
is
neighborhood
shopping.
District
is
a
mix
of
some
mixed
use
and
some
residential.
There
are
varying
Heights
of
two
story
up
to
three
a
little
bit
higher
than
three-story
buildings
in
the
immediate
vicinity.
A
L
AY
AD
AY
A
Any
questions
or
comments
from
the
board.
P
H
I
was
going
to
ask
given
their
raising
the
existing
structure,
any
opportunity
for
landscaping
or
or
Street
trees.
L
Through
the
chair,
Miss
panada,
we
did
reference
this
in
the
community
meeting.
If
we
can
jump
back
to
the
street
view,
we
do
have
above
ground
utilities
on
this
side
of
the
the
street
and
we
have
committed
and,
as
I,
do
on
many
of
my
projects
to
include
Street
trees
where
appropriate
I
know
we
do
see
Street
trees
further
down
the
street,
but
based
upon
both
Public
Works
and
Parks
Commission.
A
Any
other
questions
or
comments
is
there
anyone
here
to
testify,
either
in
favor
or
in
opposition
to
the
project.
AR
Yes,
good
morning,
Mr
chair
members
of
the
board,
Natalia
Benitez,
with
the
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood
Services
ons,
hosted
a
Butters
meeting
for
this
project
in
June
1st,
through
directive.
Letters
during
the
meeting
to
express
School
support
both
of
others
stated
that
they
would
like
to
see
this
area
of
Chelsea
Street
being
more
developed
and
beautified.
The
applicant
met
with
the
eagle
Health
aesthetic
Association
on
two
different
occasions
to
present
a
project.
AR
Excuse
me,
the
group
voted
to
oppose
this
project
with
eight
members
supporting
and
nine
opposing
those
who
supported
believe
that
this
project
is
a
good
addition
to
the
neighborhood
and
those
that
opposed
do
not
want
to
see
a
single
family
homes
being
demolished
at
this
time.
Our
office
related
to
the
third
judgment,
people.
AD
AI
A
AI
C
A
Ruggiero,
yes,
Miss
love,
yes
and
I
to
him
in
favor
of
the
motion
passes
just
to
clarify
in
response
to
some
comments
in
the
chat
I'm,
not
suggesting
moving
the
the
appeal
out
of
order,
but
just
to
not
necessarily
be
at
the
end.
So
we
wouldn't
hear
before
noon
no
matter
what
yeah.
L
Mr
chairman,
just
unrelated
to
this
last
case,
we're
back
on
an
article
80
that
we,
we
believe
are
going
to
lose
one
member
and
we'll
be
back
to
a
five-member
board.
We've
deferred
I
believe
three
times
to
try
to
get
at
least
a
six-member
board,
so
I'm
not
sure
if
that
one
could
also
potentially
be
called
before
we
use
any
further
members.
Well.
A
Well,
potentially
losing
a
member
at
12
30..
So
all
right,
we
so
you
know
I-
could
never
tell
depending
on
how
much
testimony
there
is
in
any
of
these
projects.
But
there
will
be
six
member
board
November,
no
matter
what.
L
AM
A
O
A
Miss
love,
you
can
stay
until
12,
45.,
yep,
okay,
all
right,
well,
I,
think
yeah.
It's
now
11
55.
We
should
move
forward
with
the
the
and
then
at
noon.
We
should
skip
over
to
the
appeal
I.
You
know
Mr
Mr
Lynn,
that's
your
it's!
Your
call
about
what
to
do.
Okay,
I,
don't
know
what
else
to
say.
So,
let's
get!
Let's
keep
going
Mr.
E
Chair
I
just
talked
to
council.
We
can
pull
Mr
Lynn's
project.
It
is
an
11
30
case
where
we
can
pull
it.
We
can
pull
it
out
of
order
if
you'd.
E
Have
two:
we
have
two
compute.
We
have
a
companion
case,
Emery
Road,
all
right.
E
E
Okay,
follow
my
first
two
cases
for
11
30
case
boa
1144072,
273,
Maverick
Street,
there's
a
companion
case,
boa
1144075-275
to
279
Maverick
Street.
This
is
the
273
just
to
give
3
400
square
feet
of
land
from
the
existing
8
000
square
foot
fossil
to
be
combined
with
275
279
Maverick
Street.
This
possible
now
will
contain
4
600
square
feet
with
a
pre-existing
multi-family
dwelling.
There's
no
work
to
be
done:
violence,
article
53,
section,
9,
the
additional
lot
areas
and
sufficient
article
53
section
9.
E
E
This
is
combined
subdivided
Lots
with
existing
9000
square
feet
with
three
thousand
four
hundred
four
hundred
square
feet
in
the
adjoining
parcel
of
5267
square
feet.
The
lot
will
now
contain
12
400
square
feet.
The
violation
is
article
53,
section
8..
This
is
a
forbidden
in
an
MFR
3F
2000
sub
District
article
27t-5.
This
is
in
the
East
Boston
iPod
article
53,
section
56.5
Falcon
maneuverability
article
53,
section
56
Osprey
parking
loaning
article
53,
section
9,
the
additional
arteries
insufficient
article
53
section
9,
the
floodier
ratio
is
excessive
medical
53,
section
9.
E
L
Good
morning,
Mr
chairman
members
of
board,
thank
you
for
taking
me
out
of
order.
Richard
Lynn's.
AI
L
Street
East
Boston
on
behalf
of
petitioner
with
me,
I,
believe
we
have
Tim
Loranger
if
we
could
make
him
a
panelist
as
the
project
architect.
If
we
can
just
scroll
back
quickly
one
more
slide
back,
please
we
can
go
over.
You
perfect,
so
Mr
chairman
we're
excited
to
be
before
the
board
today
on
this
project,
which
was
subject
to
Art
of
the
lady
and
is
the
product
of
about
three
years
of
community
process
that
we've
gone
through
to
redevelop.
What
is
an
existing
parking
lot?
L
That's
been
used
essentially
for
parking
lot
and
storage
of
vehicles.
This
proposal
would
bring
a
new
32-unit
mixed-use
building
with
ground
level.
Retail
I
know
they've
noticed
it
say
36,
but
through
the
articulating
process,
we've
agreed
to
reduce
the
number
of
units
down
to
32
residential
units
and
18
on-site
parking
spaces
which
are
are
arranged
with
stackers.
It
will
also
be
additional
four
service
parking
space
is
located
directly
to
the
side
of
the
side
of
our
building.
L
As
indicated
in
the
notice.
This
will
result
a
project
that
will
combine
a
portion
of
a
lot
of
273
Maverick
Street,
with
the
existing
lot
to
create
a
new
12
000
400
square
feet
of
area.
Our
lot
width
is
about
110
square
feet,
while
in
excess
of
the
required
lot
width
under
article
53..
If
we
want
to
jump
down
to
page
five
I
believe
we
do
have
a
rendering
of
the
building
as
most
recently
reviewed
with
the
Boston
planning
and
developments,
one
more
pages,
I'm,
sorry,
Page,
Six.
L
L
Mixed-Use
residential
project
that
was
approved
by
the
board
about
four
years
ago,
it
has
been
completed
and
sold.
Each
of
those
units
have
been
sold
as
Condominiums.
Our
project
proposed
a
rental
program
for
the
building.
In
addition
to
the
required
IDP
units
under
the
city's
IEP
policy
of
13,
we
are
actually
proposing
additional
IDP
unit,
bringing
our
number
closer
to
16.
L
All
the
units
would
be
70
Ami
and
we
are
I
do
have
a
breakdown
of
the
board
requires
it
to
show
what
the
specific
units
are
at
this
time,
I'm
going
to
ask
that
Tim
laranger
walked
through
the
a
few
of
the
slides
for
the
program
to
show
the
design
approach,
as
well
as
some
of
the
landscaping
and
the
other
important
features
of
the
building
itself.
So
Tim,
if
you
can
walk
us
through
a
couple
of
the
slides,
that
would
be
very
helpful.
AB
Thank
you,
Richard
Tim
laranger,
with
Embark
for
the
record,
so
just
looking
at
the
rendering
there
from
from
Alex
Street.
One
of
the
main
things
we
wanted
to
do
is
kind
of
replicate
the
scale
of
a
portion
of
development
out
to
education,
development,
287
Maverick
without
kind
of
duplicating
the
aesthetic
of
it.
So
it
didn't
work
like
it
was
just
one
big
development
and
287
Mavericks
itself
kind
of
putting
software
proportionate
Rhythm
of
the
typical
kind
of
three
unit
three-story
building
along
along
Maverick
street.
AB
So
we
kind
of
matched
that
the
change
of
material
and,
if
you
look
at
the
kind
of
right
corner
of
the
building
there,
we
mimicked
that
three-story
masonry
data
of
273
Maverick
unit
anchor
the
corner
of
the
building
and
kind
of
Define.
The
two
edges
of
that
action
drive
here
on
the
right
side
of
the
screen
and
then
use
that
Mason
and
kind
of
throughout
these
the
kind
of
main
base
of
the
building
from
there.
AB
We
kind
of
step
back
and
have
a
like
85
percent
level
of
the
main
body
of
the
building
with
it
for
the
medicinal
material
change
at
the
fourth
and
fifth
already
had
as
it
sets
back
to
kind
of
reduce
the
kind
of
legal
presence
of
those
upper
levels.
You'd
also
notice
that
this
Roundup
we
have
substantial,
now
Scorpion
and
the
retail
space
there,
that
kind
of
activates,
the
street
Edge
and
some
additional
new
Street
trees
and
kind
of
like
storage,
because
there's
a
lot
of
that.
AB
AB
There
is
and
then
an
existing
curve,
past
and
kind
of
if
you
have
access
to
some
existing
parking
to
the
rear
of
273
model
streets,
we're
picking
up
off
of
that
utilizing,
as
you
kind
of
shared,
actually
five
future
buildings
to
enter
the
the
garage
itself
kind
of
from
the
left
side
of
the
building
here
kind
of
big
breakdowns.
The
garage
has
single-sided
parking
with
when
we're
using
this
utilizing.
The
stacker
system-
and
then
it's
has
no
presence
on
the
street
itself.
AB
So
the
street
itself
will
be
the
Milwaukee,
the
Redskins
and
then
us
about
775
square
feet,
retail
space
to
the
rear
of
the
building,
we're
maintaining
a
26
foot
setback
which
will
be
a
landscape
for
a
useful
open
space
for
the
residents
and
then
have
some
kind
of
larger
pensions
as
well.
To
offer
kind
of
a
visual
screen
to
the.
AB
So
this
is
just
a
little
bit
more
detail
on
that
kind
of
treatment,
condition
where
we're
maintaining
more
than
five
feet
for
the
protection
Zone,
but
also
offering
kind
of
a
pavement
chain
to
define
the
the
visitor
bike
parking
in
offers.
An
air
there's
two
trees
there
and
then
there's
also
another
kind
of
paper
change
and
step
back
where
we
have
the
entrance
of
the
lobby
and
Retail
and.
F
AB
Just
a
little
bit
more
detail
on
the
Landscaping
in
the
rear
yard
setback
which
would
be
for
Resident
use,
we
have
kind
of
pockets
of
seating
in
the
lower
planting
areas
and
then,
additionally,
in
addition
to
the
planting
for
our
Advanced
Logic
the
entirety
of
the
real
property
line.
This
is
an
example
of
the
SSI
in
the
top
right
corner
trying
to
keep
going
here's
just
a
session.
AB
We
did
a
lot
of
work
with
the
butters
on
average
feet
to
kind
of
create
what
that
setback
would
be,
what
the
plantings
would
be,
how
the
dog
needs
to
work,
so
the
units
to
the
rear
of
the
building
would
go
against
you
when
you
get
to
the
plant.
I
do
have
balconies
and
we're
going
to
plant
the
trees
at
a
minimum
of
a
24
so
fairly
fairly
large
new
planting
that
would
be
mature
to
kind
of
screen
out
those
that
we
even
offer
that
become
offer.
AB
So
here's
just
kind
of
the
architectural
personal
plan
showing
those
17
Staffing
spaces
with
the
additional
accessible
space
we
also
are
showing
Point
Parking
within
the
building
within
the
garage
that's
accessible
through
the
garage
or
from
the
video
that
setback
and
then
that
retail
space
typical.
So
there
are
32
units.
The
second
third
and
fourth
floors
are
identiful
with
nine
units.
Each
combination
of
one
two
and
three
bets
with
our
group,
one
Studio
every
unit-
has
a
we
are
as
a
exterior
exact,
except
for
the
studios.
AB
The
total
Matrix
is
three
Studios
for
an
average
of
1455
square
feet,
17
one
beds
when
the
average
is
700
square
feet,
nine
two
beds
with
an
average
of
940
square
feet
and
three
three
beds
with
an
average
of
110
five
square
feet.
AB
So
you
notice
there
was
that
kind
of
role
of
one
battle
on
the
reality
shot:
those
those
private
decks
to
keep
scrolling
the
fifth
floor,
setbacks
on
every
side
and
consolidation
of
units
into
some
parts
and
then
he's
looking
at
the
elevation.
Here.
We
match
the
height
of
the
development
at
287,
so
we're
at
59
feet
6
inches,
and
this
is
I
think
this
is
the
west
elevation
there
along
that
driveway.
L
AQ
L
Tim
Mr
chairman
Tim,
did
not
mention
it.
This
also
does
include
40
bike
parking
spaces.
We
have
34
residents
and
10
for
guests
and
that
is
located
internally
and
able
to
be
accessed
from
the
rear
landscape
area.
With
respect
to
the
proposed
Florida
ratio,
we
are
at
2.56
in
the
height
of
our
building
is
a
total
of
59
and
a
half
feet.
L
Our
front
yard
setback
is
a
modal
setback,
consistent
with
the
design
recommendations
through
the
articulating
process
with
ppda
in
our
as
we
mentioned,
our
reader
and
setback
is
at
26
feet,
which
is
something
that
we
work
very
closely
with
with
our
director
Butters
to
our
rear,
which
are
long,
Everett
Street,
who
I
believe
are
here
to
speak
on
the
project.
At
this
time,
I
will
pause
and
ask
the
Board
address
any
questions
or
concerns
about
the
project.
So.
A
L
Correct
based
upon
the
Matrix
of
units,
the
same
percentage
based
upon
our
percentage
of
units
is
the
allocation
for
the
IDP
units
and,
as
I
mentioned,
they
are
all
70
AFI.
Okay,.
A
In
terms
in
terms
of
the
rear,
you've
got
the
decent
sized
setback.
Is
there
it
kind
of
looked
I?
Couldn't
quite
tell
it
looks
like
there's
programming
back
there
for
the
residents,
as
is
it
patio
space?
What
what
is.
L
It
exactly
we
could
jump
back
to
slide
six
I
believe
and
I'll.
Let
Tim
walk
through
a
little
bit
more.
So
there
is
some
outdoor
patio
space
it
is,
it
is
active
or
at
least
able
to
be
activated
for
CD
I.
Think
we'll
just
go
forward,
one,
please
yeah!
So
we
do
have
some
opportunity
proceeding
and
active
space
in
the
mirror
and
again,
very,
very
generous
Landscaping,
with
mature
trees
that
were
specifically
requested
by
direct
with
others.
Okay,.
P
P
AB
Yeah,
that
includes
the
spaces
as
well.
Okay,
so.
A
AI
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman
members,
on
the
board.
We
are
recommending
Google
with
A,
continuous
design
review
on
this.
It
was
an
article
80
project
and
a
board
that
quoted
unanimously
and
we're
moving.
A
Okay
can
I
anyone
here
to
testify,
either
in
favor
or
in
opposition
to
the
project.
AR
The
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood
Services,
the
community
process
for
this
project
was
conducted
by
the
vpda
for
which
they
hosted
two
Community
meetings,
one
in
November
2021
and
the
second
one
in
April
2022..
The
project
was
also
presented
to
the
Gulf
Street
studies
associations
on
multiple
occasions.
Ultimately,
the
project
gained
good
support
from
the
Butters
and
community
members.
AR
Our
office
has
received
five
five
letters
of
support
from
director
Butters
and
19
letters
in
opposition,
I'd
like
to
point
out
for
the
board
that
six
upset
letters
come
up
from
New
Hampshire
residents,
I'm
12
from
the
broader
community,
and
only
one
from
an
East
Boston
resident
at
this
time,
our
office
elected
to
the
phone
judgment
support.
Thank
you.
AR
A
Okay
curious
as
to
why
anyone
from
New
Hampshire
would
would
weigh
in
on
an
East
Boston
project,
but
who
knows
anyway,.
Y
Yep
we
have
a
few
raised
hands
here.
Bob,
are
you
all
set
I
know
your
hand
is
crazy.
AO
Yes,
yeah
Mr
chairman
members
of
the
boardwalk
Amigo
BTD
I'm
a
little
confused
about
the
number
of
spaces.
I
I
see
23
on
the
plans,
but
it
says
only
22
requested
so
I
like
to
have
clarification
on
that.
L
Sure,
through
the
early
process,
18
internal
spaces,
which
will
be
stackers,
and
there
are
four
surface
spaces,
as
shown
on
the
on
the
site
plan:
22,
telephone,
no
22.,
okay,
okay,.
Y
Y
BE
Can
you
hear
me
better
now:
Daniel
crupe,
120,
Everett
Street
we're
directly
behind
the
project.
We've
been
working
with
the
developer
and
Richard
for
the
past
two
years
and
we're
very
happy
with
you
know
what
what
they've
presented
to
us
and
addressing
our
concerns
that
we'd
like
to
be
on
the
record
for
supporting
this
project.
Thank
you.
Yeah.
BD
Thank
you,
Milan
Ambassador,
Mr,
chairman
members
of
the
board
minor
Perez,
representing
all
our
members
of
the
living
working,
East,
Boston
and
their
families.
We
like
to
go
and
record
and
support
of
this
project.
AM
Hello
good
afternoon,
my
name
is
Allison
Eng.
My
address
is
126
Everett,
Street
I'm,
also
the
owner
of
128
Everett
Street,
which
is
directly
behind
this
property
I'd
just
like
to
just
voice
my
support
for
the
project,
the
developer
and
the
attorneys
were
very
responsive
when
they
were
building
287
Maverick
street
with
any
issues
we
had
during
the
construction.
So
I
just
like
to
go
on
the
record
for
support
for
the
project.
Thank.
BF
Sure
please
share
I'm
at
120.
Everett
Street
with
Dan
I
just
wanted
to
Echo
his
sentiments
that
we've
been
working
with
the
Developers
for
the
past
couple
of
years,
I'm
very
happy
with
the
sort
of
rear
treat
and
the
the
screening
that
they're
providing
and
think
it's
an
improvement
as
compared
to
some
of
the
historical
development
in
the
neighborhood.
Thank.
P
A
C
A
H
A
A
Sorry
Miss
Lowe
and
I
too,
in
favor
of
the
motion
passes.
Thank
you
very
much
all
right.
If
we
can
move
on
to
the
the
appeal
case
that
I
think
that
that
would
be
appropriate
and
then
we
could
have
the
full
board
here.
That's.
E
What
we're
doing
Mr
chair,
I'm
gonna,
go
for
the
re-hearing
at
the
12
o'clock
case
calling
case
boa
117-3599
535
to
537b
Washington
Street.
This
is
a
change
of
Lottery
to
retail
canvas
establishment.
The
violations,
article
51
section
16,
the
retail
cannabis
establishment
use-
is
conditional
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
BG
Good
afternoon
Mr
chairman
members
of
the
report,
Brian
Grossman
about
it
to
Dewey,
200,
Crossing,
Boulevard,
Suite,
300,
Framingham
Massachusetts
for
Council
for
peer
releases
and
I
believe
Kobe
Evans
should
also
be
on
for
Pure
Oasis.
A
Okay
now
well,
this
is
a
re-hearing.
There
was
an
appeal
and
to
read
to
re-hear
the
case
for
those,
since
not
necessarily
every
member
of
the
current
board.
With
that
that
hearing,
can
you
quickly
just
sort
of
summarize
it
again?
Why
we're
here
and
what
you're
looking
for.
BG
Sure,
as
the
board
knows,
the
proposed
use
is
for
a
retail
marijuana
establishment.
The
proposed
use
will
rehabilitate
and
reinvigorate
the
vacant
space
formerly
owned
or
used
by
Swan
Cleaners.
It
does
meet
all
of
the
buffer
zone
requirements,
so
there
are
no
variances
required.
It's
only
a
conditional
use
permit.
BG
The
the
use
will
have
approximately
3
500
square
feet
of
retail
space
and
then
back
of
house.
In
addition
to
backup
house
space,
the
hours
proposed
were
10
a.m
to
8
P.M.
BG
The
hours
are
similar
to
uses
for
nearby
for
nearby
businesses
and,
in
some
cases,
much
shorter
than
some
of
the
nearby
businesses,
some
open
at
about
six
or
seven
a.m.
On
some
of
the
nearby
restaurants
go
until
you
know,
10
10
a.m,
at
10
pm
or
later
the
site
itself
has
four
parking
spaces.
Those
four
parking
spaces
would
be
for
employee
use.
BG
The
site
is
zoned
for
retail,
and
so
therefore,
it
is
appropriate
to
consider
both
similarly
situated
retail
marijuana
establishment
applications
throughout
the
city
that
are
comparable
as
well
as
other
uses.
That
would
just
be
permitted
by
right
at
the
site
when
you're
looking
at
the
the
effects.
BG
The
the
two
concerns
we've
heard,
the
most
are
both
traffic
and
parking,
and
we
need
to
compare
the
proposed
use,
compares
favorably
on
both
fronts,
with
both
uses
that
were
similar
uses
and
applications
that
have
been
proposed
throughout
the
city
for
other
retail
marijuana
establishments,
as
well
as
other
retail
uses
that
could
just
be
made
in
the
site
by
right.
That
would
not
require
Board
review
or
other
review
as
well.
A
Okay,
so
what
so?
The
board
previously
denied
the
appeal
and
then
in
September
we
voted
to
Grant
reconsideration,
that's
where
we
are
today
so
I
think
probably
what
makes
most
sense
would
be
to
take
testimony
once
again
and
and
hear
from
those
in
favor
and
those
opposed
about
the
merits
of
the
case,
so
that
since
we
voted
to
Grant
reconsiderations,
so
that
we
can
in
fact
reconsider.
A
BG
We
could
just
go
to
slides
eight
and
nine
I
have
a
couple
seconds
on
those
two
and
then
I'll
be
happy
to
deal
before
Mr
chairman
Mr.
A
BG
So
slight
is
to
go
to
slide.
Eight
there
we
go
on
on
traffic.
As
noted
on
the
slide,
the
proposed
use
at
peak
times
will
result
in
a
potential
increase
of
less
than
five
percent.
The
expert
reports
submitted
concerning
both
parking
and
traffic
demonstrate
that
there's
no
serious
Hazard
to
vehicles
or
pedestrians
there's
going
to
be
no
adverse
effects
on
parking
and
traffic
they're.
BG
Both
the
parking
inventory
and
traffic
volumes
are
adequate,
as
as
noted
on
the
slide,
the
project
will
have
minimal
effect
on
vehicle
delayed
for
Washington,
Street
and
nearby
intersections.
The
area
is
not
an
interest
intersection,
a
hot
spot
for
accidents
shown
on
slide
10,
but
only
four
accidents
at
Washington
Street
and
fair
at
the
Fairbanks
intersection
since
2015,
so
not
even
in
the
last
year,
but
since
2015..
BG
U
BG
Could
go
to
slide
nine
during
the
peak
times
there
are
approximately
124
parking
spaces
available
they
meet
at
the
vicinity.
Only
15,
approximately
with
during
those
peak
times,
would
need
to
be
occupied
by
pure
Oasis
customer
and
again,
this
parking
demand
is
very
comparable
to
other
uses
that
are
buy
right.
That
could
be
located
at
the
property
without
any
review
by
the
city
and
particularly
the
zba
one
last
thing,
Mr
chairman
one
thing
that
was
mentioned
at
the
at
the
very
end
of
the
last
hearing
was
potentially
a
condition
about
coming
back
in
a
year.
BG
If
it
were
granted
to
come
back
in
a
year
and
review
whether
or
not
there
are
any
adverse
impacts
that
need
to
be
addressed
or
anything
of
that
nature.
That.
P
W
BG
BG
The
entrance
onto
the
property
is
in
the
business
in
the
back
and
it
would-
and
we
are
not
talking
18
wheelers,
so
you're
talking,
you
know
smaller
smaller
truck
or
smaller
delivery
vehicles.
They
would
be
able
to
navigate
past
vehicles
that
are
parked
on
the
site.
I
think
that's
we're
showing
a
slide.
Three
I
think
it's
like
two.
There
we
go,
and
so
you
can
see
the
the
top
there.
BG
The
four
spaces
that
are
labeled
and
then
right
there
in
the
in
the
middle
on
the
left
is
the
loading
area
is
the
loading
area,
loading
dock
and
so
the
delivery
vehicle
would
be
able
to
maneuver
past
parked
cars
into
that
loading
area
and
then
back
out
without
without
the
need
for
reshuffling
of
cards
or
anything.
P
A
That
and
you
know,
as
I
recall
from
the
previous
hearing,
my
memory
is
not
that
great,
but
I
think
Mr
D'amico
said
that
four
cards
that
it
wouldn't
work
for
four
cards.
It
was
a
reduced
number
I.
Think
two.
AO
This
is
Henry's
Madam,
sorry,
Mr
chairman
the
members
of
the
board,
Boston
transportation
department.
Four
cars
cannot
fit
in
that
area
and
again
I
go
back
to
what
I
said
before
the
maximum
that
should
be
in.
There
is
two
for
appropriate
and
safe
maneuverability
and
I'm
still
confused
how
the
loading
vehicle
is
going
to
go
in
there
without
being
affected
by
the
the
vehicle
spot.
On
that
lot,.
BH
This
is
Kobe
from
Pure
Oasis.
When
we
take
deliveries,
it's
it's
it's
optimal
for
the
the
loading
vehicle
to
actually
go
on
the
property,
but
unfortunately
it's
not
necessary.
They
could
park
in
the
the
driveway
area
of
the
parking
area
and
unload
there
and
then
come
through
the
gate.
AO
Mr,
chairman
and
members
of
the
board,
be
obonto
against.
I
would
like
to
see
a
revised
parking
plan
to
show
two
spaces
in
Access
and
egress
to
the
Loading
area.
If
that
would
be
acceptable,
yeah.
P
Why
don't
you
go
Sherry?
You
might
have
my
the
same
same
question
and
I
can
follow
up.
B
Sure,
thank
you
and
I.
Don't
know.
Bob
may
know
the
answer
to
this
better,
but
I
just
want
to
understand
the
124
street
parking
spaces
that
you've
counted
a
little
bit
better.
So
so
are
you
like
how
far
deep
down
or
or
deep
are
you
going
into
residential
streets
and
what
types
of
parking
spots
are
these?
Are
these
dedicated
like
commercial?
You
know
customer
type
parking
or
are
they
residential
non-resident?
You
know
residential
during
certain
hours,
Etc
and.
BH
So
this
is
co-we
again
we
have
we
contracted
with
a
traffic
engineer
and
he
went
out
and
did
a
survey
of
the
immediate
area.
Most
of
those
spaces
were
on
Washington
Street
and
they
were
open
parking
spaces.
What
we're
seeing
in
the
industry
has
relates
to
cannabis
is
that
as
we
get
more
dispensaries,
people
are
not
coming
from
one
neighborhood
to
another.
The
golden
Boston,
for
instance,
is
to
have
neighborhood
dispensaries,
so
there
would
be
no
need
from
for
someone
to
come
from
Alston
over
to
Brighton
to
consume
the
parking
space.
BH
A
BH
P
BH
We're
gone
are
the
days
where
cannabis
dispensary
is
inundated
with
people.
We
have
things
like
Order
ahead.
We
have
delivery,
we
have
the
proliferation
of
cannabis
dispensaries
throughout
the
city,
and
so
even
in
our
current
location
in
Grove
Hall,
we
never
come
close
to
our
Max
occupancy
load,
just
based
on
the
nature
of
the
industry
as
it
stands,
so
things
like
Order
ahead
and
delivery
augment
for
a
rush
of
people
in
the
store
any
one
time.
But
again
what
we
can
do
is
we've
just
never
run
into
that
situation.
P
AD
P
Then
the
other
question
is:
how
can
you
describe
your
security
plan
in
accordance
to
the
state
regulations
for
cannabis,
establishment.
BI
P
Specifically
speak
on
Security
in
relation
to
the
neighboring
residents.
You
know,
residents
are
typically
concerned
with
these
establishments
loitering
and
particularly
you're
a
budding
a
residential
unit.
How
do
you
ensure
that
there's
no
trespassing
of
private
property.
BH
Yeah,
so
we
we've
had
a
number
of
community
outreach
meetings
and
we've
heard
from
the
community
members
and
we've,
you
know,
really
are
sensitive
regarding
things
like
people
talking
in
the
driveway,
and
so
one
of
the
things
that's
been
effective
is
a
doing
the
Outreach
and
be
having
good
visibility,
and
so
what
we
do
is
we
have
security
guards
stationed
outside
of
our
current
location.
Looking
out
for
things
like
people
who
are
double
parking,
if
you're
double
parked,
you
can't
come
into
the
location.
BH
If
you
park
in
a
neighbor's
driveway,
and
then
they
will
report
you,
then
you
will
get
warned
and
potentially
banned
from
the
shop,
and
so
in
the
larger
picture
we
work
with
control
Security
in
their
International
Security
consultant,
and
they
came
up
with
our
security
plan
based
on
their
years
of
experience,
and
so
cameras
are
good.
Alarm
systems
are
good.
We
have
a
an
automated
deterrent
in
the
back
of
our
current
facility
that
if
they
see
there's
motion,
then
there's
an
audible
voice.
BH
That
says,
you
know
you're
trespassing,
but
cameras
are
good
and
Outreach
is
better,
just
being
a
good
neighbor,
a
good
Community
partner,
making
sure
that
you
have
good
contact
with
the
neighbors
and
literally
giving
up
my
cell
phone
number
in
case.
There
are
any
incidents
a
neighbor
can
call
me
directly
and
and
that
we
can,
you
know
remediate.
AM
P
BH
Right
now
we
have
a
security
guard
station
on
Blue
Hill
Ave
at
all
times,
looking
out
for
things
like
double
parking.
Looking
out
for
lawyering
it's
illegal
to
smoke
in
public,
we
really
want
to
make
sure
that
we
are
abiding
by
a
the
law
and
B
being
a
good
Community
partner
to
make
sure
that
no
one
is
deciding
to
smoke
out
front,
and
we
just
can't
take
it
for
granted
that
people
understand
the
law
so
literally
every
day
that
we're
open
there's
a
person
that'll
be
standing
on
in
the
lab
monitoring
the
sidewall.
M
BG
Who
are
under
the
under
the
code,
some
of
the
allowed
uses
are
what
they
call
the
local
retail
establishments.
That's
those
are
things
like
a
small
takeout
right,
but
it's
like
a
small
takeout
restaurants,
category
which
would
be
a
restaurant
under
2500
square
feet,
and
even
that
not
even
though
our
equipment
bigger,
even
a
small
takeout
restaurant
like
that,
would
have
a
comparable
turnover
in
terms
of
good
bulk
traffic.
Local
retail
establishments
are
ones
that
involve
baked
goods
groceries,
and
so
that
would
involve
getting
something
like
a
vape
shop
or
any
other.
Really.
BG
BG
A
Okay,
I
think
we're
gonna.
Let's
turn
the
public
testimony.
Is
anyone
here
to
speak?
Let's
do
in
favor
first
and
oppose
next.
X
Mr
chair:
do
you
want
to
hear
from
elected
officials?
First
start?
Yes,
yes,
sorry
Mr,
chair
members
of
the
board
Connery
with
the
mayor's
office
Neighborhood
Services.
At
this
time
the
mayor's
office
like
to
go
and
record
on
opposition
to
this
proposal,
as
we've
testified
before
we've
heard
from
another
residents
for
Community
meetings
with
concerns
related
to
pedestrian
safety
through
the
layout
of
the
intersection
increase
congestion
on
a
major
artery
that
connects
this
neighborhood
with
the
rest
of
Austin
Brighton
as
well
as
concerns
with
the
proximity
to
residences
next
door.
X
We
received
90
letters
in
opposition,
mostly
from
directed
letters,
opposition
expressed
from
the
neighborhood
civic
association,
the
Brighton
Austin
Improvement
Association,
as
well
as
the
local
state,
reps
State,
rap
Michael,
Moran
and
State
Rep
Kevin
hohen.
We
do
also
want
to
notice,
though,
that
we
received
200
letters
in
support
that
were
submitted
by
the
applicant,
the
portrait
of
access
to
all
of
those
letters
that
we
spoke
of.
BJ
Go
ahead:
go
ahead!
Oh
okay!
It's
always
an
adventure
with
me
on
Zoom,
but
for
that
you
think
I'd
be
used
to
it.
After
almost
three
years.
This
is
representative
Michael.
Moran
I,
unfortunately
have
to
represent
this
community
for
18
years
and
I've
lived
here.
BJ
My
whole
life
you've
heard
my
testimony
in
the
past
and
I
just
want
to
just
say
one
thing:
you
know
in
this
community
we
have
endorsed
and
supported
marijuana
establishments,
and
we've
been
against
some
and
they've
just
purely
been
based
on
the
Merit
of
the
of
the
location
and
whether
it
fits
with
the
community
around
it,
and
this
one
is,
is
in
a
real
tough
spot
with
with
I
mean
I.
Don't
want
to.
BJ
You
know,
get
into
the
parking
situation,
but
I
will
just
say
this
about
what
what
the
gentleman
said
is
that
124
spaces
on
Washington
Street
when
you
consider
voting
zones-
and
you
consider
High
attention-
you
consider
handicap
spots
and
bus
lanes
and
bike
Lanes
I
have
no
idea
how
far
you
would
have
to
go
up.
Washington
Street
to
get
to
124,
but
I'm
sure
they
have
a
reputable
Transportation
group.
BJ
That
will
claim
that,
but
I
can
just
tell
you
as
a
resident
I
hope
that
the
the
board
now
I
think
this
is
the
third
time
they've
considered
this
I
hope
the
board
will
be
consistent
with
them
down
in
the
past
and
support
myself
and
Kevin,
and
the
mayor
and
the
community
and
saying
that
we're
not
against
marijuana
in
our
community
and
Retail,
but
in
this
location
it
just
doesn't
fit
and
I
hope
that
the
board
would
would
confirm
that
again
at
the
end
of
this
committee.
AM
A
Or
representative
elected
okay,
so
to
open
up
to
the
public
I,
don't
know
how
many
raised
hands
there
are
I.
Don't
want
this
to
go
on
forever,
since
we
have
heard
this
multiple
times
already.
AK
BK
Yes,
I
will
I'm
right
next
door,
I'm
only
30
inches
away,
narrow,
dark
actually
between
our
buildings.
I'm
quite
concerned
about
security
issues,
but
one
of
the
things
I
want
to
really
bring
up.
Is
that
a
very
persuasive
argument
that
pure
Oasis
has
brought
up
and
was
followed
up
by
a
board
member
is
that
this
should
be
approved,
because,
if
not
this
well,
something
else
will
go
in
there
and
I.
Think
that's
not
a
valid
argument.
BK
I
think
it
should
be
dismissed
because
we're
looking
at
this
case
we're
not
looking
at
what
might
be
down
the
road,
whether
it
have
more
traffic
or
less
traffic.
We're
looking
at
the
specifics
of
this
with
the
security
issues,
the
traffic,
the
parking,
the
opposition
from
the
neighborhood.
So
please
I
urge
the
board
to
please
any
argument
that
this
should
be
approved
because
complete
something
else
will
just
go
in
there
and
I.
BL
Yes,
listen.
Can
you
hear
me?
This
is
Leanne
Brandon
I'm
at
19,
Langley,
Road
and
neighbor
I
I,
just
I,
don't
want
to
rehash
the
parking,
but
I
would
like
to
find
one
of
those
124
spaces.
When
I
come
home
in
the
in
the
late
afternoon,
there
are
no
spaces.
The
other
thing
I
would
like
to
say
is
that
the
neighbors
have
all
sought.
90
neighbors
within
several
blocks
of
pure
oasis's
prospective
site
have
signed
a
petition
against
it
and
I
just
hope.
BL
BI
Y
L
BI
Go
hi,
my
name
is
Edmund
Alcock
I
am
Council
for
William
and
EduCare
who
live
at
5,
39
and
5
41.
Y
Okay,
Annabella
go
ahead.
BM
Camera
members
of
the
board
Annabelle
Gomes
from
the
Brighton
Austin
Improvement
Association
we'd
like
to
go
on
record
again
again
opposing
this
proposal
with
the
concerns
of
traffic
parking
issues
and
the
use
it's
a
full
will
attract
a
lot
more
traffic
to
the
area
than
a
dry
cleaners
would
or
some
of
the
local
restaurants
that
would
have
a
longer
time
period
for
the
customers,
not
a
six
minute
turnover.
So
we'd
like
to
stay
on
record
opposing
this
proposal.
Thank
you.
A
More
hands
how
many
might
I
mean
I
am
concerned
that
I
think
we're
going
to
lose
someone
one
of
our
members
very
very
soon.
So
I
would
like
to
keep
this.
How
many
raised
hands?
Are
there
no.
AK
Go
ahead
hi.
This
is
Sheila
Gleason
at
551,
Washington,
Street
and
a
butter
just
up
the
road
and
I
would
just
like
to
go.
Put
my
opposition
on
record
again,
and
there
is
no
parking
on
the
street
124
spaces
was
found,
was
found
during
the
pandemic
when,
when
basically
everybody
had
moved
out
of
town,
but
there
are,
there
is
no
parking
there.
Any
time
now,
I
try
to
get
out
of
my
driveway
after
6
pm,
and
there
is
always
somebody
blocking
it,
always
not
certain
time.
BN
Go
ahead,
yes,
my
name
is
Edward
show
care
my
wife's
King
Johnson
from
Alum
541
Washington
Street,
and
we
strongly
oppose
this
request
for
a
conditional
abuse
of
the
many
issues.
In
the
sake
of
time,
I'll
just
focus
on
one,
and
that
has
to
do
with
the
one
that
is
cannabis
store.
It's
not
just
any
local
retail
business,
both
squares
large.
We
have
residential
and
Village
like
Environmental,
but
the
presence
of
a
security
guard
on
the
street.
BN
O
A
All
right:
well,
let's,
let's
move
to
the
let's
move,
to
consideration
the
board,
any
any
further
comments
or
questions
on
the
board.
If
not
I
would
entertain
a
motion.
P
C
E
E
P
A
M
A
M
Gonna
make
a
motion
to
approve
a
bpda
design
review
with
a
one-year
Sunset
to
come
back
to
the
board
in
a
year
from
occupancy.
To
give
us
an
update
on
the
various
things.
P
H
P
No,
that
was
I'm,
sorry
and
the
fight.
The
fifth
one
is
to
provide
a
a
memo
that
is
visible
to
the
public
of
who
to
call
and
contact
in
therapy.
If
there
is
a
problem.
C
M
A
A
Miss
Loeb,
yes,
I,
will
support
it
as
well.
There's
enough
for
the
motion
to
pass.
A
Right,
how
many
more
cases
do
we
have
do
we
do
we.
A
F
A
Applicants
Miss
Logan:
are
you
still
here.
A
Okay,
you
too,
we
are
a
six-member
board,
which
means
that
any
applicants
can
choose
to
a
request,
an
administrative
deferral.
So
let's
go
back.
Let's
go
to
Emery,
Road
sure.
E
E
Well,
I
don't
want
to
call
all
the
way
in
so
I'm
going
to
call
rediscussion
for
anybody
who
wants
to
defer
that
project
due
to
the
board's
six
members,
45
Milton,
Ave.
Okay,
thank
you
all
in
case
boa
one,
two,
three,
six:
zero,
eight
four,
forty
five
Milton
Ave
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
BO
C
C
G
P
H
A
Rugero,
oh
miss
Logan's
gone
I
am
truly
in
favor
of
the
motion
passes.
What
can
we
do
for
a
date?
Mr
Fortune.
E
Well,
I
just
asked
blue
Council,
but
when
we
have
to
do
February
7th
at
11,
30.
wow.
C
E
AA
You
Mr
chairman
members
of
the
board
attorney
Jeff
Drago,
with
Drago
and
Toscano,
with
the
business
address
of
11,
Beacon
Street
seeking
and
administrative
deferral
motion.
H
H
E
Okay,
hearing
none
we'll
go
right
to
Emory
Road
calling
case
boa
129
638-149
Emory
Road.
There
is
a
companion
case,
boa
1296380-49,
rare
Emory
Road.
This
is
449.
This
is
nowhere
to
be
done,
is
to
convert
the
bond
to
a
single
family.
The
two
dwelling
structures
on
one
lot:
this
is
this
is
one
of
two
buildings
on
one
lot:
violation:
article
51
section
9,
Open,
Spaces,
insufficient
article
51,
section
57.13,
two
or
more
dwellings
on
the
same
lot
and
article
5169,
lock,
whipped,
is
insufficient
and
article
51,
section
9
lot.
Frontage
is
insufficient.
E
Emory
Road
this
to
convert
the
existing
structure
as
a
bond
and
convert
to
a
single
family
house.
New,
dormant
and
renovate
two
dwelling
specs
is
on
one
lot,
no
work
to
be
done.
This
is
one
of
two
buildings
on
the
same
lot:
a
violation,
article
51
section
9,
Open
Spaces,
insufficient
article
51,
section
57.2,
an
existing
building
alignment;
Conformity
article
51,
section
57,
the
application
of
the
dimensional
at
one
building
behind
one
another,
article
51,
section
57.13,
two
and
more
dwellings.
On
the
same
lot,
article
51
section
9
lot
width
is
inefficient.
E
BO
This
is
a
proposal
to
convert
an
existing
Barn
to
a
single-family
dwelling
I
understand
the
board's
position
with
two
Standalone
dwellings
and
one
parcel,
but
this
is
a
very
unique
proposal
that
differs
to
others
that
have
been
front
of
this
board
this.
This
street
here
is
a
dead
end
Street
and,
as
you
get
down
to
the
property,
it
immediately
Bots
a
public
park
on
the
right
hand,
side
by
way
of
History.
This
property
has
been
family
owned
since
nineteen
since
1875
well
over
50
years
ago.
BO
The
only
change
to
the
existing
structure
will
be
to
add
a
dormer
to
the
right
side
of
the
dwelling
in
order
to
comply
with
the
building
code
for
the
current
stairway,
as
you
can
see
from
the
existing
condition
of
the
premises.
The
layout
was
in
fact
designed
as
a
dwelling
and
the
layout
will
not
be
changed.
The
proposal
is
located
within
a
3F
4000
sub-district
and
is
currently
an
existing
two-family
on
a
lot
of
approximately
6
306
square
feet.
BO
The
height
of
the
proposed
dwelling
is
18
feet
by
11
inches
and
again,
that
proposed
height
of
the
dwelling
will
still
remain
in
existence.
The
far
what
we're
proposing
between
the
two
is
a
0.54
existing
is
a
0.38.
What
is
compliant
is
at
0.8.
The
square
foot
of
the
proposed
lot
is
987
square
feet
for
that
Carriage
House.
To
be
converted
to
a
dwelling.
BO
The
existing
two
fin
is
approximately
2400
square
feet,
we're
also
proposing
to
linking
the
actual
curb
cut
from
approximately
11
feet
and
three
inches
to
20
feet
in
order
to
meet
the
fire
code,
access
requirement
violations
as,
as
previously
stated,
two
or
more
dwellings
on
the
same
lot,
application
of
dimensional
existing
building,
Conformity
locked
with
lock
Frontage
the
front
yard
setback
code
calls
for
20
feet.
The
existing
two
fan
is
17
feet
and
two
and
a
half
inches
and
the
proposed
dwelling
is
approximately
nine
feet
and
seven
and
a
half
inches
the
side.
BO
Yet
cold
calls
for
10
feet.
The
existing
two
fan
is
one
foot
and
eight
and
a
half
inches
on
the
left
side
and
third
feet
and
one
and
a
quarter
inch
on
the
right
side.
The
proposed
dwelling
is
one
foot
on
the
left
side,
I
mean
I'm.
Sorry,
one
inch
on
the
left
side
and
two
feet
on
the
right
side,
but
please
note
again
that
this
property
directly
abuts
a
public
park
open
space.
The
code
calls
for
1950
square
feet,
which
is
equivalent
of
650
square
feet
per
dwelling.
BO
Our
proposal
is
at
one
thousand
three
hundred
and
thirty
nine
square
feet
at
this
time,
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
the
board
for
any
questions,
comments
or
concerns.
A
Okay,
so
the
only
work
that's
being
done
on
the
the
front
house
is
the
Dormer.
A
And
on
this
Barn,
what
has
it
been
used
for
in
the
past.
BO
So
it's
it's
again,
it's
it's!
It's
always
been
laid
out
that
you
know
it's.
It's
been
laid
out
existingly.
The
way
you
see
the
layout
in
the
conditions,
I
believe
it's
on
page
three
I
believe
it
is
that
you'll
see
that
you
know
the
layout
mimics
an
actual
Carriage
House
per
se,
but
nothing
has
really
been
really
operative
in
this
location.
Again,
so
I
believe
at
one
point
in
time.
BO
By
way
of
history,
there
was
the
owner's
intent
to
convert
that
over,
but
as
as
time
lapses
and
again
it's
it's
been
in
the
same
family
since
1875..
So.
BO
The
layout,
as
far
as
the
the
is
no
structural
work,
the
layout
is
going
to
remain
the
same,
but
I'm
sure
there'll
be
some
sort
of
upkeep
to
ensure
that
everything
else
is
compliant.
A
A
Mechanical
electrical
Plumbing
Systems
are
all
proposed
as
part
of
this
project.
Yes,.
A
All
right
so
can
we
show,
can
we
not
the
existing?
Can
we
show
the
proposed
drawings
the
floor
plan
for
the
barn.
A
Same
footprint,
yeah,
okay,
but
all
right,
so
we've
got
a
we've,
got
a
so
there's
a
basement
and
which
will
remain
as
storage,
yes
and
a
habitable
first
and
second
floor,
correct
all
right
and
what
it
what
is
on
the
first
floor?
What's
on
the
second
floor,
I
can't
quite
tell
them
my
eyes.
Aren't
good
enough.
Yeah.
BO
You're
going
to
walk
in
on
it,
you'll
have
a
dining
room
on
the
right
hand,
side
you
can
have
an
open
concept
kitchen
and
then
also
you're,
going
to
walk
into
the
living
room.
As
you
see
the
staircase
on
the
right
hand,
side.
The
proposed
second
floor
is
where
you'll
have
access
to
a
two
bedroom
in
one
bathroom
up
there.
Z
A
All
right,
well,
I,
I,
mean
historically,
this
board
has
taken
a
very
dim
view
of
two
dwellings
on
one
lot:
that's
that's
for
sure,
but
and
and.
BA
A
Again
on
the
front
building,
the
only
the
only
change
is
the
Dormer.
BO
A
All
right,
how
are
the
drawings
with
Raza.
P
The
drawings
the
drawings
are
adequate
in
terms
of
the
fire
truck
with.
Is
your
distance
to
too
far
away
from
the
carriage
house
to
propose
a
regular
12
foot
wide
or
10
foot
wide
yeah.
BO
Well,
it
has
been
reviewed
by
the
architect
and
I
believe
there
was
a
a
fire
expert
code
expert
on
it,
as
I've
been
sent
over
to
the
fire
department
for
official
review,
as
it
appears
that
we're
going
to
be
compliant
with
the
24th
access.
A
Okay,
I
know
Mr
Hampton
also
has
to
leave.
Are
you
still
are
you
still
here,
Mr
Hampton.
AI
I
am
Mr
chairman.
Thank
you.
Bpda
recommended
denial
without
prejudice
the
reason
being
two
dwellings
on
the
lot,
and
you
know
it
appears
that
the
work
has
already
been
done
on
that
Carriage
House.
So
we're
opposed
to
this
the
interior
proposal
to
the
carriage
house,
yeah,
yes,
having
the
second
dwelling
on
the
same
lot,
yes
or
most
of
that.
AI
So
I
mean
it's
you
get
into
that
slippery
slope
where
the
work's
already
been
done
and
now
they're
trying
to
legalize
it.
So
we're
just
opposed
to
the
two.
A
AI
BO
A
Yeah
I
know:
let's
not
go.
This
is
a
simple
answer
to
this
question.
The
things
that
are
shown
right
now
on
the
proposed
drawings
by
chewing
company
have
those
been
done
yes
or
no?
What's.
BO
BO
BO
Is
here
too,
who
who
I
assume
have
done
in
order
to
get
those
accurate
drawing
Dimensions?
Can.
Q
Be
used
to
chewing
company
so
when
I
went
out
to
do
preliminary
documentation
for
this
building
it,
it
is
not
fit
out.
It's
open
stud
wall
I
actually
put
my
foot
through
the
floor
on
the
second
floor,
when
I
was
doing
documentation.
So
as
of
the
the
data
when
I
started.
A
That's
what
we
wanted
to
know.
Thank
you.
You're
welcome,
sir,
all
right
any
other
questions
on
the
board.
Is
there
anyone
here
to
speak,
either
for
or
against
the
proposal?
Chris.
AU
Good
afternoon
honorable
chair
members
of
the
board,
Frank
Mendoza
here,
Austin
Brighton
liaison
with
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood
Services
here
to
testify
that
at
the
butters
meeting,
no
major
concerns
were
raised
about
us
expressed
support.
They
felt
the
proposal
was
modest
and
provided
an
opportunity
to
keep
a
young
family
in
the
neighborhood,
particularly
given
that
in
Austin
there's
often
a
perception
that
young
families
are
being
forced
out
or
not
able
to
come
into
the
neighborhood.
The
applicant
also
had
a
constructive
meeting
with
the
ACA.
AU
The
board
should
have
a
letter
on
file
from
the
all-centric
association
expressing
support
with
the
Proviso
that
no
building
code
relief
be
granted.
The
Brighton
Austin
Improvement
Association
also
feels
that
the
rear
dwelling
should
have
the
rear
structure
should
be
sprinkler.
As
usual,
we
defer
to
the
Judgment
of
the
board.
Thank
you.
AK
Y
AL
Yes,
good
afternoon,
Mr
chair
members
of
the
board
turning
to
the
door
representing
the
Austin
civic
association,
we'd
like
to
go
on
record
and
support
I
would
like
to
remind
the
board
that,
at
the
previous
hearing
we
had
a
another
project
a
little
bit
similar
to
this
on
Waverly
Street
in
Brighton,
where
we
added
existing
two-family
home
and
the
proponent
wanted
to
build
an
additional
two
family
on
the
same
lot,
and
this
was
completely
investor
owned
and
the
board
went
ahead
and
approved
that
project.
AL
So
here
we
have
a
situation
where,
yes,
the
structure
exists,
but
obviously
it's
a
gut
rehab
situation
and
again
just
to
reiterate
these
are
long-term
homeowners
of
Austin.
A
young
long-term
tenant
would
like
to
remain
in
the
community,
so
I,
I,
again
I,
just
in
terms
of
the
person
and
setting
I,
realized
the
historical
nature
of
the
board
when
it
comes
to
two
buildings
on
one
lot
but
as
I
said
in
Waverly,
speeding,
Brighton
this
board
went
ahead
and
approved
the
project
very
similar,
so
I.
We
would
like
to
go
and
look
at
these
report.
Y
J
Thank
you,
I
just
wanted
to
First
confirmative
Market,
please.
Oh
sorry,
Teresa
conti
and
I'm.
The
homeowner
at
49,
Emery
Road,
wanted
to
just
first
confirm
that
there's
no
work,
that's
been
done
there.
Nothing
recently,
and
you
know
to
add
to
that.
I
think
that
one
of
the
reasons
you
know
beyond
the
fact
that
we
do
want
to
create
space
for
a
young
family
has
been
already
has
been
said
to
stay
in
Brighton.
J
The
other
issue
is
is
that
there
is
work
that
needs
to
be
done
to
this
building,
it's
an
old
building.
It
really
needs
rehab,
it's
you
know,
quite
frankly,
an
eye
store
in
the
neighborhood
right
now.
So
it
would
be
nice
to
be
able
to
put
the
resources
into
the
structure
and
be
able
to
give
that
a
significant
upgrade.
It
does
about
the
ringer
playground
here
and
I
think
that
it
would
be
a
nice
way
of
you
know,
enhancing
the
neighborhood
thank.
BM
Yeah,
as
a
member
of
the
board
Annabelle
Gomes
from
the
Brighton
Austin
Improvement
Association,
first
I'd
like
to
go
on
record
that
we
I
don't
recall
them
presenting
to
the
Bia.
So
I
am
not
speaking
as
a
vote,
but
more
should
it.
You
know
we
do
want
to
support
families
which
could
be
approved
that
the
safety
features
from
the
fire
department
be
addressed.
It
is
a
house
behind
the
house
and
that
it
be
sprinklered
so
that
the
neighborhood
is
safe.
It
is
a
dead
end,
Narrow
Street.
Thank
you.
Thank.
F
BP
Hi,
my
name
is
Lee
Nave
I'm,
a
butter
at
11,
High
Rock
way,
I'm
in
support
of
this
project,
I've
known
Teresa
for
about
five
eight
years
now
and
been
a
neighbor
for
the
last
three
years.
This
particular
project
I
think,
is
at
a
great
location.
It
gives
an
opportunity
for
homeowners,
a
young
family
to
stay
in
a
neighborhood,
and
the
homeowner
herself
has
lived
there,
basically
her
entire
life,
and
so
this
isn't
you
know
someone
coming
in
to
try
to
flip.
BP
O
AV
All
right
good
afternoon,
this
is
more
my
crazy
councilor
Braden's
office.
The
counselor
would
like
to
go
on
support,
go
on
record
for
this
project.
This
typology
of
a
carriage
house
in
the
rear
is
not
uncommon
in
the
neighborhood
and
you
believe
it's
inappropriate
to
make
an
apartment
out
of
this
type
of
house,
given
that
it's
safe
for
fire
access.
Thank
you.
Mr.
E
P
You
Mr
chair
I
like
to
make
a
motion
of
approval
with
two
Proviso
one,
with
BT
bpda
design,
review,
paying
special
attention
to
a
walkway
path
connecting
to
rehab
structure
and
sidewalk,
and
two
that
no
additional
parking
be
allowed
in
this.
For
this
proposal
to
allow
preservation
of
open
and
clean
space.
P
C
Mr
Fortune,
yes,
Mr.
Yes,
yes,.
P
A
Rochero
and
I
to
him
in
support
of
the
you
know:
two
dwellings
is
an
issue,
but
with
the
adus
I
think,
that's
something
that
the
city
is
considering
more
expansively,
so
motion
passes.
E
On
the
last
last
case
of
the
day,
calling
DOA
one
three
one,
one:
seven,
six,
three,
fifty
nine
Falcon
Street
this
directed
four
unit
residential
dweller
with
roof
decks.
The
violations,
article
53
section
56
Osprey
parking-
is
insufficient:
medical,
53,
6th
and
8th.
It's
the
MFR
and
the
two
F
zone
is
forbid
article
27
t-5.
This
is
an
East
Boston
iPod
article
53,
section
52,
roof
structure,
restrictions,
article
53,
section
57.2
conforming
with
existing
billing
alignment;
article
53
section
9.
The
politician
was
excessive
article
53,
section
9.
The
building
has
success
of
its
stories.
E
L
Good
afternoon
Mr
chairman
members
of
the
board,
Richard
Lynn's
245
Sumner
Street,
East,
Boston
behalf
of
the
petitioner
Julius
sogel,
who
started
a
project
at
59,
Falcon
Street.
If
we
can
scroll
down
so
that's
a
good
place
to
start
right
there.
So
Mr
chairman
Staffing,
is
located
in
the
lower
section
of
the
eagle
Hill
Neighborhood
of
East
Boston.
As
you
can
see
here,
we're
looking
over
West
Eagle
Street,
as
well
as
onto
Falcon
Street
in
the
industrial
area,
located
off
of
Condor
Street
towards
the
top
of
the
screen.
L
Our
proposal
would
would
erect
a
new
four-unit
residential
dwelling.
We
could
probably
jump
to
the
next
slide
on
this
one
on
a
vacant
lot.
A
lot
that
that
exists
presently
is
2430
square
feet.
It
is
a
separately
assessed
lot.
It
is
currently
used
for
parking
for
a
fee.
Essentially,
spaces
are
rented
out
in
in
the
neighborhood
for
people
to
have
off-stream
parking.
L
It
is
not
part
of
any
required
parking
for
any
of
the
properties
of
the
immediate
vicinity
has
remained
vacant
for
quite
some
time,
but
we
can
jump
to
slide
five
I
think
that
would
be
a
helpful
slide.
So
what
we're
seeing
here
is
the
existing
condition
on
the
left.
Side
is
a
project
this
board
approved,
that
is
at
61
Falcon
Street.
Our
proposal
is
pretty
similar
in
size
and
scale
as
to
what
what
has
been
built
at
61
Falcon
Street.
L
One
of
the
features
very
similar
to
the
project
with
61
Falcon
that
we
are
proposing
is
a
unit
that
would
have
Ada
adaptability
at
the
round
level.
Unlike
a
lot
of
the
buildings
that
do
exist
in
the
section
of
Falcon
street
they're,
all
rock
Up
Style
units,
so
they
have
very
limited
ability
to
have
accessibility
options
for
the
existing
housing.
Our
property
would
provide
that
at
the
lower
level
each
of
the
units
are
generously
sized
two
bedroom
plus
units.
They
are
about
a
little
over
from
a
thousand
square
feet
up
to
about
1155
square
feet.
L
L
With
respect
to
the
relief,
this
is
located
in
a
2f
2000
District
that
we
do
meet
the
minimum
lot
size
requirements
as
we
do
have
a
little
over
2400
square
feet
of
land.
The
minimum
lot
width
of
25
feet
is
exceeded
actually
this
site
at
about
27.7
feet.
We
are
proposing
side
yards,
although
we
do
request
a
variance
for
the
left
side.
L
Our
building
is
set
at
one
foot
off
of
the
property
on
the
left,
I
believe
the
directive
butter
to
our
left
is
in
support
of
this
proposal
and
therefore
I
have
no
issue
with
that
setback.
That
allows
us
to
create
a
five
foot
setback
on
the
right,
which
creates
a
little
bit
more
additional
buffer
from
the
house
to
our
right
side,
as
well
as
a
pathway
for
additional
entrance
to
that
lower
Ada
style
unit.
Our.
AI
L
Guide
setback,
the
required
setback
is
actually
30
feet.
However,
we
are
permitted
to
reduce
that
down
to
20
a
little
over
23
feet
because
of
the
shallow
a
lot
exception
that
exists
in
article
53.
We
are
proposing
a
condition
a
little
over
17
feet.
There
is
substantial
slope
to
the
back
of
the
property
that
goes
up
towards
West
Eagle
Street.
Our
proposed
far
is
1.83,
that's
in
excess
of
the
0.8
that
is
permitted
in
the
district,
so
we're
requesting
to
leave
for
that
as
well.
L
The
height
of
our
building
is
at
40
feet
as
I
showed
you
in
that
previous
photo.
That
is
consistent
with
the
height
of
the
building,
immediately
to
our
left.
That
was
just
recently
constructed
35
feet
of
the
height
limits,
and
you
are
slightly
above
the
limit
by
five
feet.
With
respect
to
the
parking
five
spaces
would
be
required
for
four
units.
We
would
be
closing
the
existing
curb
cut,
which
is
a
standard
size
cut,
which
represents
at
least
one
parking
space
on
the
street.
AD
A
Okay
is
just
out
of
curiosity,
is
that
architect,
the
same
as
for
the
the
abutting
building.
L
No,
so
this
architect
is
local
Joy
Street
design
is
our
proposed
architect.
Actually
we
jump
back.
There
is
a
rendering
that
was
shown
with
the.
AY
L
Building
was
to
look
like
for
61,
but
you
can
see
the
change
so
61
we're
able
to
get
the
rendering
for
what
was
presented
through
BPD
design
review.
If
we
could
jump
back,
maybe
two
or
three
slides.
We
can
see
what
the
finished
product
looks
like
this
can
actually
backpack
the
other
way,
the
other
way
every
one
more
yeah.
So
the
project.
AB
L
A
All
right,
2,
900
square
feet
is
pretty
small,
but
I
mean
part
of
what
I'm
looking
at
is
also
the
neighboring
buildings
also
seem
to
be
on
relatively
small
Lots.
So.
L
AR
Yes,
good
afternoon,
Mr
chair
members
of
the
board,
Natalia
Benitez,
is
with
the
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood
Services
on
us
hosted
in
the
butters
meeting
in
November
of
2021
about
his
Express
concerns
regarding
density
and
parking.
The
applicant
also
met
with
the
eagle
Hill
civic
association
in
November
2021.
The
association
voted
to
oppose
due
to
the
density
no
parking
being
proposed
and
not
enough
Green
Space.
L
A
Okay
and
I
would
entertain
a
motion.
P
F
L
You
very
much
have
a
good
Thanksgiving
if
I
don't
see
any
of
you
before
that
yeah
all
right.