►
From YouTube: Zoning Board of Appeal Hearing 10-16-18 Part 2
Description
Zoning regulates the use and dimensional boundaries of privately owned buildings and land. The Zoning code is in place to protect the neighborhoods from the construction of buildings or structures that do not fit into the context of a neighborhood. The Zoning Board of Appeal hears appeals for varying the application of the Zoning Code and determines when it is appropriate to grant deviations from code restrictions.
A
B
C
D
D
A
C
E
A
Interior,
this
is
interior
innovations
for
a
change
of
oxygen
from
two
dwelling
units:
restaurant
in
offices
to
seven
dwelling
units,
restaurant
offices,
the
violations,
article
8,
section
7.
The
multi-family
is
a
conditional
use,
article
14,
section,
14,
2
addition:
a
lot
of
areas
required
article
17,
section
17,
one
open
space
is
insufficient
in
Article
23,
section
23,
1
auspey
parking
is
insufficient
name
an
address
for
the
record.
Please
good.
A
Did
you
when
the
applicant
cause
up
there?
Could
you
please
speak
up?
We've
had
a
couple
of
you
from
the
audience
not
able
to
hear
we
have
a
very
hard
time
hearing
them
as
well
and
they're
right
in
front
of
us,
so
in
that
that's
just
basically
recording.
So
you
really
got
to
lift
your
voice
appreciate
that.
Thank
you.
Good.
F
F
This
is
an
application
regarding
the
interior
renovation
of
the
third
and
fourth
floors
of
3:55
Congress
Street
in
the
Fort
Point
channel
to
convert
the
existing
office
and
live-work
space
into
seven
new
residential
units.
The
fluor
is
Lucky's
restaurant.
That
does
not
change
the
first
and
second
floor.
Our
separate
office
condominiums
owned
by
another
property
owner
those
are
not
changing,
so
this
application
relates
solely
to
the
third
and
fourth
level,
which
is
being
converted
into
residential
units.
F
We
have
in
a
butter
meeting
and
a
meeting
with
a
four-point
Neighborhood
Association
and
received
general
support
for
the
project.
The
zoning
issues
before
you
are
that
the
residential
use
is
conditional
because
this
is
the
underlying
base
code,
and
this
is
a
manufacturing
sub
district.
So
residential
uses
are
conditional,
but,
as
you
know,
certainly
the
four
point
channel
area
has
abundant
residential
use
and
the
use
is
welcomed
at
this
property.
The
zoning
relief
relates
to
additional
lot
area
of
one
thousand
square
feet.
F
Per
dwelling
unit
is
not
able
to
be
met
because
the
building
is
existing
and
occupies
virtually
the
entire
footprint
of
the
lot
area.
Usable
open
space
is
insufficient
again.
The
building
occupies
most
of
the
lot
area,
so
there's
no
place
to
do
open
space.
The
last
item
is
off
street
parking
insufficient.
So
for
the
six
there's
seven
additional
dwelling
units,
but
they
only
count
six
because
there's
already
one
existing
and
that
ratio
is
0.5.
F
So
we
would
need
three
parking
spaces
and,
although
it's
cited
in
the
letter,
we
have
agreed-
and
it
is
one
of
the
conditions
requested
by
the
four-point
Neighborhood
Association-
to
commit
to
dedicating
three
of
the
parking
spaces
which
we
own
at
the
rear
of
the
building
to
the
residential
units
and
leasing.
An
additional
parking
space
in
a
nearby
garage
on
a
long-term
basis,
so
for
parking
spaces
will
be
provided
where
three
are
required.
F
So
we
satisfied
that
as
well
just
want
to
quickly
point
out
the
support
letter
you
received
from
four-point
Neighborhood
Association,
which
expresses
support
for
the
project
but
asks
that
two
conditions
be
imposed
is
that
we
commit
to
the
parking
which
we
have
and
we
do.
The
second
is
that
they
ask
that
we
commit
to
exterior
lighting
on
the
building
which
came
up
during
our
neighborhood
meeting,
and
we
are
happy
to
do
that
and
committed
to
doing
so,
but
it
can't
be
a
condition
to
this
application
because
it's
not
part
of
this
building
permit
application.
F
Nor
do
we
own
the
entire
building,
and
this
is
a
mixed-use
condominium
building
we
own
two
floors,
but
somebody
else
owns
the
other
three
floors,
so
any
exterior
changes
would
require
unanimity
of
the
condo
association,
so
we're
certainly
committed
to
improving
the
exterior
in
a
future
phase
and
that's
what
we
said
at
the
meeting.
But
it's
not
part
of
this
application,
so
I
would
just
request
the
board
not
impose
that
as
a
condition,
because
it's
beyond
our
control
at
this
point,
if
you
have
any
questions,
I'm
happy
to
answer.
C
F
On
on
one
level,
the
current
use
is
a
live-work
space.
It
was
developed
some
time
ago
and
it
was
used
as
living
space
and
a
in
part,
a
publishing
business
and
then,
on
the
fourth
level,
again
mixed-use.
There
was
a
home
office
for
somebody
who
also
lived
on
that
floor
as
well.
So
it's
basically
converting
large
live-work
spaces
into
smaller
residential
units
exclusively
residential.
C
G
Mr.
chairman,
members
of
the
board,
John
Allison
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services,
we'd
like
to
own
record
in
support,
as
the
proponents
noted,
they
did
hold
an
abutters
meeting
presented
to
the
Fort
Point
neighborhood
association,
Fort
Point
did
send
in
a
letter
which
I
believe
the
board
has
supporting
the
project.
Thank
you.
H
A
The
next
case
calling
boah
five
one,
one:
five:
zero
five,
thirty
eight
East
sixth
Street.
This
is
a
proposed
tree
off
street
parking
at
the
rear
of
the
building
and
proposed
curb
cut
violations.
Article
68
section
33
on
street
parking
will
requires
the
Austrey
parking
facility
facilities
required
by
the
section.
60
shall
be
provided
on
the
same
lot
as
the
main
use
to
which
they
are
accessory
name
an
address
for
the
rectum
place,
good.
L
Okay,
so
I'm
here
today
with
Ellen
Quigley,
who's,
the
property
owner,
the
530
86
Street,
it's
been
in
her
family
for
40-plus
years
and
we're
here
today
seeking
three
off-street
parking
spaces
at
the
rear
of
the
building
and
those
are
gonna,
be
accessible
via
a
shared
Drive
between
538
and
542
East,
6th
Street.
So
I
don't
need
to
call
them
in
for
the
racket,
then.
A
C
L
C
M
I
Mr.
chair
members
of
the
board,
Paul
Sullivan
of
the
episode
Council
asked
Michael
Flaherty.
Do
the
fact
that
these
these
proposals
would
fall
under
the
new
article
68
in
the
effort
that
went
into
drafting
those
articles
that
article
68
Council
at
this
particular
poison,
able
to
go
in
to
support
it?
My
name
is
what
the
proposed
projects,
however,
does
recognize
that
certain
projects
do
have
American.
We
leave
it
to
the
discretion
of
our
fourth.
A
On
the
next
case,
calling
VOA
8
6
3
2
6
3
6
7
76
East
6th
Street,
26,
listen!
This
is
a
renovation
but
proposed
one-story
edition
with
basement
at
the
rear
of
the
property
in
a
one-story
addition
at
the
third
floor
with
roof
deck,
the
violations-
article
27
s,
section
5.
This
is
in
the
South
Boston
iPod
applicability,
article
68,
section
28
of
29
roof
structure
restrictions,
article
68,
section
8,
the
phylidia
ratio
is
excessive.
A
B
C
C
C
M
M
N
H
H
P
Nicholas
store
I'm
gonna,
pull
that
up
I'm
an
attorney
with
a
business
address
of
one
to
three
South
Street
in
Boston
speaking
today
on
behalf
of
Sean
burns,
who
is
the
director
butter
at
780,
East?
Sixth
Street
mr.
burns
strongly
opposes
the
project
for
a
number
of
reasons,
the
first
being
that
it's
simply
too
large
for
the
lot,
particularly
with
regard
to
the
rear
addition.
It
simply
crowds,
abutting
property
owners
and
produces
open
space,
and
this
is
going
to
be
the
impact.
P
P
Secondly,
it's
gonna
create
significant
safety
risks,
because
the
applicant
will
be
accessing
the
rear
of
the
property
to
construct
the
rear
addition
by
using
the
six
foot
wide
alleyway
that
runs
behind
the
property.
This
is
the
same
alleyway
that
mr.
burns
and
other
property
owners
use
to
access
their
property
by
foot
and
by
vehicle
and
in
bringing
construction,
equipment
and
construction
vehicles
through
this
narrow
alleyway.
It's
going
to
create
significant
safety
concerns
for
mr.
Burns's,
family
and
other
property
owners,
so
because
of
the
significant
effects
on
the
neighboring
properties
and
the
neighborhood.
Q
Q
The
addition
is
setback
and
approximately
18
feet
in
change
in
the
zoning
setback
is
20
feet,
as
you
see
in
the
three-dimensional
drawings
that
we
provided,
there
are
existing
rear
decks
to
the
left
and
right
of
the
property,
the
rear
that
exceed
the
dimension
of
the
proposed
project
or
consistent
with
that
in
terms
of
building
height.
The
main
roof
of
the
building
is
approximately
35
feet
and
a
hat
6
inches
above
the
street
grade,
and
that
is
approximately
the
same
height
of
the
existing
building,
which
the
individual
to
my
left
is
raising
question
about.
C
Q
It's
approximately
the
same
height
I,
don't
have
the
data,
but
it's
within
that
story
line.
The
the
head
house
itself
is
is
above
the
height
of
35
feet
in
terms
of
off
street
parking,
it's
on
record
as
a
unit
building.
There's
no
change
in
the
occupancy
is
Denys.
Quality
had
pointed
out
so
when
I
increasing
the
parking
demand
and
the
bedrooms
that
are
existing
in
the
building
are
four
and
there's
no
change.
The
proposed
bedroom
unit
count.
C
Q
B
C
C
A
A
It
also
add
decks
to
the
back
of
the
building
and
add
roof
deck
violations.
Article
27
s
section
nine:
this
is
an
assault.
South
Boston,
iPod
enforcement,
article
68,
section
29,
the
roof
structure
restriction
is
article
68,
section
33
la
Street
biking
is
insufficient.
Article
68
section
is
7.2.
Basement
units
are
forbidden,
article
68,
section
8,
the
flawed
EI
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
68,
section,
8
side
yard
is
insufficient.
Article
68
section
8
Reyat
is
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record.
A
Could
you
please
really
speak
up
up
there
I
feel
like
you
need
to
get
a
hearing.
Aid
apologize
and
it's
bad
acoustics
for
everybody
have,
but
individuals
are
sitting
right
in
front
of
his
I
can
really
can't
even
hear
them.
So
if
you
could
really
speak
up,
we
would
greatly
appreciate
it
by
this
board.
Thank
you.
C
R
R
So
the
project
before
you,
the
zoning
in
this
neighborhood,
is
multi-family
residential.
The
current
is
a
it's
a
currently
being
used
as
a
floor
family.
It
changes
from
a
three
flow
family
to
a
family,
update
kitchens
and
baths
and
ad
decks
to
rear
on
the
violation.
One
of
the
things
that
was
mentioned
was
a
roof
deck
that
has
been
removed.
So
that
is
not
part
of
this
proposal
before
you.
As
you
stated,
the
violations
are
the
iPod
roof
structure,
restrictions
which
is
being
removed
off
free
parking,
which
is
pre-existing.
R
These
are
attached
row
houses,
there's
no
driveway,
so
everybody
in
the
neighborhood
has
no
off
street
parking
basement
unit
forbidden.
This
is
currently
being
used
as
a
basement
unit.
An
F,
AR
and
the
zone
in
this
area
is
to
the
existing
is
2.28
that
will
not
change
again.
Side
yard,
nothing
to
change
the
rear
yard,
which
we
have
a
deck
that
was
added
and
that
deck
is
causing
a
Marriot
violation
off
the
back.
That
is
just
on
the
lower
level.
The
unit
size
is
in
the
basements
508
square
feet.
That's
for
a
1-bedroom
1-bath.
R
R
H
O
And
after
mr.
chairman
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
from
511
s:
seventh,
on
the
street
unit
number
one
perceptive
opposition
to
the
plans
as
they
stand
out.
First
reason
is
currently
in
the
basement:
beautiful
agenda
strata
support
the
building
added
by
the
previous
owner
at
some
point
in
time
was
never
converted
to
a
property.
O
I
believe
that
that
residents
capacity
here
is
the
past
three
years
no
one
has
resided,
and
you
know-
and
it's
been
vacant
property
prior
research
last
night-
something
division
in
the
basement
about
a
funny
to
find
records
in
English,
and
the
second
reason
why?
But
both
is
right
now
the
plans
as
they
are
not
consistent
with
the
iPod,
especially
with
the
addition
of
the
form
unit.
O
O
C
R
Just
quickly
I'm,
the
issue
was
raised
with
respect
to
the
shadow
study.
The
shadow
study
when
we
were
contacted
by
the
mayor's
outs
of
naval
services
was
provided
to
them
to
forward
to
the
Rada
we
didn't
have.
The
direct
contact
information
that
was
provided
from
the
developer
would
show
that
there
would
be
no
shadow
impacts
whatsoever
on
his
property,
which
currently
has
a
roof
deck
as
well,
and
that
was
more
to
deal
with
the
roof
down.
J
C
A
List
created
three-story
addition
to
an
existing
19
existing
19
Eastman
Building,
which
extends
living
space
into
a
new
basement.
Increased
building
rocky
from
six
to
six
families
create
a
roof
deck
for
the
three
new
units
which
extends
over
the
existing
roof.
The
violations-
article
65
section,
eight
Emma
fires-
have
been
in
a
three
F
5,000
district
article
65
section
9,
the
Floyd.
A
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
65,
section
9,
the
building
height
is
excessive
and
stories
radical
65,
section
9,
the
building
height,
is
excessive
in
feet.
A
O
S
Yes,
good
morning
what
you
have
in
front
of
you
good
afternoon,
your
honor.
Yes,
sorry,
we
have
two
lots
that
are
being
merged
together.
This
is
a
3f
5000
district.
One
of
those
two
Lots
has
an
existing
three
family
on
it.
The
other
is
a
vacant
lot.
Through
the
merger
of
these
two
Lots,
we
were
proposing
a
six
unit
building
that
is
in
like
and
scale
and
kind
to
the
neighborhood.
It
won't
feel
like
a
16
at
billion.
It's
gonna
feel
like
two
threes
that
are
lightly
linked.
S
We
went
through
an
excellent
neighborhood
process
with
the
uppermost
corner,
Neighborhood
Association.
We
had
a
fantastic
process
with
them.
With
overwhelming
support.
We
have
all
of
the
things.
I
think
that
are
big
check
boxes
for
the
board
in
terms
of
parking.
We
are
satisfying
those
needs,
for
we
have
1:1
ratio
for
the
units.
S
The
units
are
gonna,
be
condominiums,
so
that's
also
an
advantage
for
the
neighborhood
they
will
indeed-
and
so
these
are
gonna,
be
marketed
toward
families
and
we're
really
trying
to
help
this
neighborhood,
and
this
is
a
corner
lot
which
really
could
help
with
a
lot
of
positive
development.
In
the
area
so
we're
excited
about
it.
C
S
C
T
A
Come
on
your
next
case
calling
VOA
eight
six,
five,
four,
eight
three
one
sixty
two
I
Street:
this
is
a
renovated
kitchen,
new
new
master
bedroom,
replace
windows,
bring
new
partition
walls,
install
new
doors
installing
the
floor,
the
violation,
article
27
s,
section
5s
in
South,
Boston,
iPod,
applicability,
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
share.
C
U
U
U
G
H
C
A
The
last
case
for
9:30
calling
VOA
eight
to
four
seven,
six,
five
ten
when
della
Street.
This
is
a
demolish:
an
existing
building,
erected,
four-story
six
unit,
residential
building
with
rear
roof,
decks
and
six-car
garage
evaluations,
article
13
section,
1,
a
lot
of
areas,
insufficient
article
13
section,
one
additional
lot
areas:
insufficient
article
13,
section
1,
the
phylidia
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
13,
section
1,
the
building
height
is
excessive
and
feet
nautical
13
section,
1
the
front
yard,
isn't
sufficient
article
13
section
1
the
really
a
distance
efficient,
an
article
13
section
1.
X
Tim
Johnson
architect,
190
old,
calling
out
Houston.
Mr.
chairman
members
of
the
board,
this
project
started
out
as
a
four
story:
six
unit
building
with
six
parking
spaces
through
the
community,
interaction
with
the
abutters
and
also
an
tow
square
Civic
Association
we're
now
presenting
a
three-story
five-unit
building
with
five
car
garage.
Through
this
redesign,
we
did
remove
one
of
the
zoning
variances,
which
was
height
in
feet.
X
We
do
have
front
X,
which
are
dedicated
to
each
unit.
We
have
top
roof
ducts
dedicated
to
each
unit
and
accessed
via
a
bulkhead
and
roof
door
and
then,
lastly,
the
unit
breakdown
ground-floor
are
the
five
parking
spaces
with
one
accessible
unit
at
2-bedroom,
2-bath
1031
square
feet.
Second
floors
a
two-bedroom
two-bath
that
approximately
eleven
fifty
square
feet
and
the
top
units
two-bedroom
two-bath
at
1,200
square
feet.
Y
G
Mr.
chairman,
members
of
the
board,
John
Ellison
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services,
we'd
like
to
own
record
in
support.
As
the
performant
noted,
this
started
as
a
project
where
there
was
a
lot
of
negative
feedback
from
the
community
around
height
and
other
issues.
The
developer
did
work
with
the
neighbors
and
the
Civic
Association
to
come
to
a
revised
project
that
works
for
everyone.
So
we
applaud
them
for
doing
that.
Thank
you.
H
Z
A
30
hearings,
the
first
case
boa
a
three
five:
seven:
nine
five
sixty
five
Burrell
Street.
This
is
erected
three-story,
building
with
three
residential
units.
A
violation
is
article
50,
section
29,
the
lobby
areas
insufficient
article
50
section
29,
the
additional
lot
areas:
insufficient
nautical
50
section
29
a
lot
width
is
insufficient
Lincoln,
50,
section
29.
A
lot
of
frontage
is
insufficient.
Article
50
section
29
the
floor.
The
a
ratio
is
excessive.
Nautical
50,
section,
29
usable
open
space
is
insufficient.
Article
50,
section
29.
A
D
Now
this
particular
building
will
be
conned
alized
and
the
unit
sizes
rain
are
all
the
same
identical
at
a
thousand
forty
one
square
feet:
three
bedroom
two
bath
units,
although
we
are
not
creating
parking,
we
are
restoring
kirkut,
so
three
curb
cuts
that
you
can
see
on
the
front
page
be
replaced
as
part
of
this
project.
We
actually
had
two
about
our
meetings
when
well.
D
We
also
worked
with
a
particular
Park
called
unity,
Park
and
Roxbury
to
help
green,
add
to
green
space
and
rehab
that
park,
as
well
as
part
of
this
project,
just
to
go
over
some
of
the
violations
that
were
mentioned.
It
is
a
three
out
four
thousand
district,
where
at
two
thousand
seven
hundred
and
eighty
four
square
feet,
so
we
are
seeking
a
bearings
for
lot
size,
both
width
and
frontage.
Fifty
is
what
the
code
asked
for
word.
32,
our
FAO
is
one
point.
D
Three
four
point:
eight
is:
what's
allowed
open
space
650
per
unit
we're
at
483,
but
that's
why
we
also
wanted
to
work.
Helping
with
update
one
of
the
parks
in
the
areas
as
well.
Side
yard
is
10
is
required,
we're
at
5
feet,
10
and
5
feet
6,
respectively,
and
although
we
don't
are
creating
parking
on
site,
we
are
restoring
those
three
curb
cuts.
All
the
sprinkler
room,
mechanicals
and
storage
would
be
in
the
basement.
D
D
D
AA
D
A
A
five
two,
four
four:
eight
thirteen
to
fifteen
Worcester
Square,
this
area
moved
to
existing
decks
at
the
rear
of
the
building
on
levels.
Three
and
four
install
new
new
deck
structures
at
level.
Three
and
four
we
appear
the
existing
deck
at
the
rear
of
the
building
on
level
two
at
existing
location,
the
violations,
article
64,
section,
nine
point:
four
townhouse
row
house
extensions
and
lodging
read
a
person's
name
and
address
for
the
record
play
morning.
AC
Members
of
the
board,
my
name's
Tyrone
Sayers
I,
live
at
13
Worcester
square
number.
Three
I've
been
a
resident
since
2005,
with
Holland
from
Holland
construction
and
PJ's
'men,
kWh
design,
large
spinner
engine
from
the
13
Wooster
square
and
rich
Trevino
from
mr.
square
we're
here
this
morning,
seeking
zone
relief
or
a
deck
repair
and
renovation
project
to
replace
2004
replacement,
repair,
2005
decks
that
came
before
this
board
13
or
14
years
ago.
AC
There
are
three
decks
power
level,
the
third
level
and
the
fourth
level
each
deck
services,
two
units
with
with
the
sheriff's
of
dividing
railing,
non-structural
I'm.
So
it's
three
decks.
The
parlor
level
is
just
repairs
to
the
existing
deck.
The
upper
two
decks
removed
and
will
be
sort
of
replaced
with
extended
decks,
pretty
straightforward
project.
We
went
to
the
Worcester
Square
neighborhood
association
and
got
their
endorsement.
The
health
and
butters
kneading
in
your
packets
I'm,
not
sure
if
you
got
everything
from
ISD,
so
they're
additional
copies
that
we
supplied.
AC
AC
AC
AC
AA
Afternoon
mr.
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
faced
a
Sharif
at
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services.
I
did
hold
on
a
butters
meeting.
It
was
well
attended,
including
the
director
butters.
The
Civic
supports
this
project.
Everybody
would
really
love
for
this
project
to
be
wrapped
up.
Dave
had
quite
a
few
issues
around
it,
but
there
is
strong
support
across
the
neighborhood
Thank
You.
AB
C
A
A
This
is
a
subdivision
of
an
existing
lot,
consisting
of
two
hundred
sixty
two
thousand
two
hundred
fifty
square
feet
into
five
different
Lots
lattes
to
consist
of
550
1568
square
feet
lot:
1a
to
consist
of
50
2856
square
feet
lot:
B
to
consist
of
58,000
236
50
lot
d
to
consist
of
72,000
59
square
feet
with
a
six-story
and
a
lot
a
to
be
26,000
441
square
feet.
Lot
d
is
the
apostle
of
the
six
story:
building
at
125
a
Murray
Street,
the
sculptor
renovation
of
this
six
story.
Building
includes
overall
construction
and
site
work.
A
The
violation
is
article
29,
section
4.
This
is
in
the
Greenbelt
protect
protection
overlay
district,
article
55,
section
9.
The
really
odd
setback
requirement
is
insufficient.
Article
55,
section
9,
the
lobby
area
for
additional
drawing
units
is
insufficient.
Article
55,
section
I
and
the
usable
open
space
requirement
is
insufficient
that
article
55
section
9,
the
phylidia
ratio,
is
excessive.
This
is
for
125,
a
a
Murray
Street.
This
is
an
existing
building,
is
a
2-story
building
on
a
proposed
subdivided
lot
called
parcel.
He
of
26,000
421
square
feet
of
land.
A
AC
AD
Thanks
so
much
for
having
us
my
with
the
community
builders,
we
are
partnering
with
two
other
nonprofit
housing
developers
and
the
Boston
Housing
Authority
on
the
redevelopment
of
the
125
Ann
Marie
Street
site.
Three
other
of
the
new
construction
projects
have
already
been
in
front
of
this
board.
They
appreciate
the
patience
and
time
on
this.
The
two
matters
that
are
before
you
today
are
the
the
effect
of
the
subdivision
on
the
existing
structures
built
in
1917.
So
we
are
planning
to
start
construction
shortly
on
renovation
of
the
125
Emory
Street
Apartments.
C
AD
This
is
a
Murray,
a
Murray
Street
apartments,
it's
similar
to
yes,
it's
a
located
at
125,
a
very
Street,
and
so
we
will
be
renovating
the
units
for
those
residents,
as
well
as
creating
11
new,
affordable
units
for
low-income
seniors
inside
that
inside
the
existing
footprint
of
that
building.
There
is
also
an
existing
the
pace,
Senior
Center,
which
is
run
by
a
film's
corner
health
center.
AD
AE
It's
a
building
that
we
have
had
done
work
on
in
the
past,
but
currently
we
really
have
very
limited
funding
to
keep
fully
up-to-date
and
the
existing.
Then
the
project
that's
proposed
will
have
some
renovations
to
the
building.
It
will
improve
the
site
and
hopefully
will
be
an
asset
to
the
community
and
BHA,
is
supporting
this
project
and
is
looking
forward
to
working
with
TCP
and
the
other
developers.
C
AF
AF
AG
AH
AI
AL
AM
AN
AA
Z
AO
Hello,
my
name
is
George
Liam
and
organizer
in
the
Jaypee
rocks
area
and
I
think
that
it's
important
to
be
renovating
a
building
for
the
elderly,
low
income,
housing
we're
also
in
conversations
with
the
community
builders
around
other
projects
that
have
already
gone
before
this
important
hope
to
continue
conversations
with
them
to
make
sure
those
projects
are
also
deeply
affordable.
Thank
you.
A
This
is
a
wreck
tinu
8
unit,
multifamily
building
with
parking
below
the
violations.
Article
50
section
28,
a
multi-family
dwelling
unit
8,
is
forbidden,
use
article
50,
section
29.
The
lobby
area
for
additional
dwelling
units
is
insufficient.
Article
50
section
29.
The
lot
frontage
requirement
is
insufficient.
Article
50
section
29
the
floor.
Their
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
50
section
29,
the
height
requirement
a
success
of
article
50,
section
29,
a
usable
open
space
is
insufficient
model,
50,
section
29,
the
front
yard
setback
is
insufficient.
Article
50,
section
29,
the
side
yard
setback
is
insufficient.
A
AP
Jarvis
was
spending
a
lot
of
time
in
one
kind
of
members
of
the
community
of
presidents
and
business
persons.
They
don't
unwrap
the
dudley
cafe
and
the
golden
building
in
where
so
they
bought.
This
whole
class
opens
and
they
build
they
remodeled
63
parent,
first
of
all,
with
this
of
the
neighbors
after
they
did
that.
But
they
would
then
put
eight
units
behind
it
and
instead
of
the
pudding
for
you
much
next
to
the
city's
regards
because
they
cooked
it
was
a
matter
of
right.
AP
AP
The
art
of
what
was
here
to
speak
in
favor
of
register
than
the
other
human
is
ready
to
be
sold
right.
They
would
then
think
the
neighboring
possible.
Yes,
they
would
sell
the
single-family
on
it
and
they
would
then
move
into
a
front
with
a
living
man
Hutchins.
So
when
you
look
at
the
violations,
especially
with
regard
to.
AP
Visible
and
space
and
the
violations,
where
they're
controlling
all
of
this
possible
all
of
these
possible
within
their
own
ownership,
our
ability
to
concede
that
there
is
white
available
space
in
total,
especially
when
you
look
at
all
the
twisting
here.
So
their
proposal
was
then
to
take
this
oddly
shaped
block
the
testing
and
the
dress
of
cope
with
Street.
But,
as
you
can
see,
attains
hopefully
from
coal
experiment
that
existing
driveway
curb
comes
into
the
property.
AP
AP
C
AQ
AQ
E
AQ
E
N
We
recommended
denial
and
it
was
more
of
an
administrative
error
because
we
already
had
received
plans
with
63
parent
and
then,
when
this
came
forward,
the
plans
that
were
submitted
to
us
referenced
63
parent,
but
had
no
design
for
this
honestly
I
think
what
plans
was
the
Copeland
parent,
because
I
believe
there
was
also
an
additional
violation,
scientifically
parent
which
is
widen,
even
though
those
plans
will
be
sent
over
to
us.
I.
AK
AK
So
this
property,
literally
I'm
on
the
other
side
and
as
such
I
am
NOT,
taking
a
position
because
of
the
potential
for
perceived
or
real
conflict
of
interest
here,
and
so
I
wanted
to
go
on
record
as
just
a
matter
of
transparency
and
clarity,
not
only
for
the
owners
of
this
property,
but
certainly
for
all
of
the
residents
who
are
here
today,
so
that
you
just
know
that
I
am
NOT,
taking
an
official
position,
public
or
private
on
this
project,
because
I
am
a
director
butter.
So
thank.
C
C
AA
Afternoon,
members
of
the
board,
mr.
chair,
my
name
is
visa
Sharif
with
the
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood
Services.
We
are
taking
a
position
on
this
and
to
support
this
project.
There
were
several
butter's
meetings
that
were
held
most
recently,
I
believe
it
was
September,
27th
and
October
4th.
The
neighborhood
really
is
split
on
this,
but
there
is
a
Civic
Association,
the
historic
Moreland,
Neighborhood
Association
that
does
support
this.
AA
AR
Know,
mr.
chairman,
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
Robin
classic
my
wife
and
I.
We
live
at
63,
parent,
Street
and
I
wrote
it
down
for
myself.
I
don't
lose
track,
it's
pretty
intimidating
up
here,
so
as
the
Dragon
virus
to
propose
the
open,
33
common
street.
We
believe
that
this
is
a
good
proposed
use
of
the
land
we've
done.
AR
If
this
is
a
maintaining
the
feel
of
the
neighborhood
with
owner-occupied,
family-oriented
feel,
and
the
current
proposal
plan
has
our
support
understanding
the
concern
of
our
neighbors
regarding
the
height
of
the
building,
which
we
hope
will
be
addressed
between
the
opposing
neighbors
and
the
developer.
Thank
you.
I
Mr.
chair
members
of
the
board,
Paul
Sullivan
on
behalf
of
city
councilor,
at-large,
Michael,
Flaherty
I'll,
be
able
to
be
abutters
council
of
flattery,
like
to
request
a
deferral
at
this
time.
The
residents
who
have
reached
out
to
our
office
have
stayed.
They
are
not
opposed
to
development.
Taking
place,
however,
have
raised
concerns
on
the
number
of
variances
being
sought
by
granting
and
deferral.
The
stakeholders
can
continue
a
thorough
community
process
with
hopefully
and
improved
proposed
development.
Thank
you.
AS
AT
Name
is
Nia
Beverly,
dunker
and
I
live
at
3,
Langford
Park,
which
is
right
behind
the
project.
If
you
look
at
the
lot,
the
lot
is
very
unique
and
it's
kind
of
cramped
in
and
it's
basically
sitting
in
the
back
facing
the
back
of
every
bill
every
street
that
it's
I,
don't
know.
I
hope
you
can
look
at
the
I,
don't
know
if
you
guys
have
a
lot
in
front
of
you.
If
you
would
look
at
it
just
to
see
how
unique
it
is.
AT
It's
slammed
behind
my
Langford
Street
Copeland,
Street,
Burton,
Street
and
parent
Street.
So
it's
landlocked,
it's
very
oddly
shaped
most
of
the
homes
surrounding
are
wood
frame.
We
have
some
concerns.
Some
real
safety
concerns
about
fire
fire
access
that
how
can
a
fire
truck
actually
come
in
to
the
driveway
of
the
this,
where
these
eight
units
are
going
to
be
I
mean
you,
a
fire
truck
cannot
come
down
that
pathway.
Where
the
address
really
is
33
copeland.
Street
you
can't
a
fire
truck
cannot
enter
when
we
spoke
with
the
the
owner.
He
said.
AT
Oh,
it's
going
to
come
to
parent
Street,
but
then
the
owner,
who
actually
was
here
to
support,
wasn't
even
really
aware
that
what
the
plans
were
about
that
he
actually
opposed
the
project.
That
day
at
the
abutters
meeting.
The
butters
meetings
are
another
issue
that
we
have.
The
abutters
were
only
notified
less
than
24
hours
in
advance
that
there
was
going
to
be
a
meeting
like
six
o'clock.
That
night
I
got
a
letter
saying
that
six
o'clock,
the
next
night
there
was
going
to
be
a
meeting
not
on
site.
C
AT
I
live
it's
going
to
be
towering
over
my
house.
We
asked
for
a
shadow
study.
He
did
not
supply
a
shadow
study
and
in
the
and
there's
a
park
my
kids
go
to
that
park.
There's
not
that
many
parks
in
that
area.
In
Roxbury.
We
actually
have
two
for
a
large
area
in
Roxbury
that
we
have
tons
of
kids
coming
and
going
down
that
Street.
C
Official
here
for
the
other
folks
who
were
testifying,
if
you
register
your
opposition,
but
in
terms
of
the
substance,
if
you
have
new
things
to
add,
we
had
the
shadow
study
density,
open
space,
access
to
public
safety
mentions.
Please
don't
repeat
what
someone
has
already
said,
but
you
just
let
us
know
your
opposition
and/or
provide
us
with
new
information.
Mr.
AI
AU
There
I've
been
to
several
meetings,
I'm
surprised
that
one
of
these
representatives
says
that
there's
a
butters
have
been
split.
All
these
letters
have
been
completely
against
this
property.
We
actually
the
position
with
17
of
our
butters
that
all
oppose
this
I.
Don't
want
to
say
that
safety
is
an
issue,
but
this
driveway
will
concern
a
safety
issue,
because
it's
going
to
create
a
through
path.
It's
gonna
lead
from
parent
Street
to
our
street,
as
mr.
pisani
had
said.
There's
no
no
front
view
on
koblan
Street.
AU
There's
no
reason
to
have
a
köppen
street
address
if
you
type
it
in
Coleman
Street.
It's
gonna
drop
you
in
from
that
driveway
in
front
of
my
house
for
safety
reasons.
If
there's
a
fire
I'm
sure
that
you
don't
want
them
to
end
loop
around,
they
can't
get
down
Waverly
Street
to
get
to
the
parent
Street
address.
It
doesn't
make
any
sense
to
have
a
Coke
open
street
address.
It
doesn't
make
any
sense
to
open
this
up.
AU
Also
with
the
just
about
the
light
study
thing,
I'm
I
had
to
walk
back
to
my
apartment
three
times
today,
cuz
I
thought
I'd
left
my
window
open
because
I
received
so
much
light
because
my
rear
facing
windows
as
soon
as
the
structure
goes
in,
which
is
three
feet
taller
than
my
building
on
a
hill
I,
will
receive
no
light.
I'm
gonna
have
a
drive
through
with
sixteen
cars
leaving
outside
my
window,
which
that
driveway
space
is
so
narrow
in
certain
parts.
AU
If
I
have
a
window
air-conditioning
unit,
a
truck
would
take
out
my
window
unit.
I
have
a
rest
concerns
with
my
foundation.
The
side
of
my
building,
as
you
can
see,
from
these
images,
it's
a
very
narrow,
driveway,
there's
actually
rear
entrances
from
the
basement
of
these
buildings
into
that.
Driveway
also
I
know
that
we
don't
have
ownership
on
it,
but
our
building
does
have
an
easement,
as
was
in
existence
for
some
time.
As
far
as
I'm
concerned
says
overburdens
of
an
easement.
AU
We
will
not
be
able
to
access
this
if
there's
gonna
be
cars
coming
at
us
in
this
direction,
and
currently
we
have
an
easement
that
allows
us
to
go
that
way
into
our
back
yard,
as
well
as
the
houses
next
to
us.
This
was
in
the
past.
Was
a
coal
cart
to
deliver
coal
to
all
of
our
houses.
This
was
not
designed
for
large
SUVs
and
the
cars
of
today.
At
one
point
in
time
it
might
even
a
drive
up.
AV
They
were
up
for
the
exact
same
variances
of
insufficient
space
and
has
claimed
that
he
has
listened
to
the
neighborhood,
except
that
we
are
here
for
the
same
variances
and
the
other
thing
I'd
like
to
bring
up
is
the
elevation
difference.
My
property
sits
below
this
property
and
my
concern
with
the
insufficient
space.
The
insufficient
green
space
is
the
lack
of
drainage
it's
about
to
be
winter,
whereas
all
of
that
water
going
it's
going
to
come
down
that
elevation
increase
into
my
basement
into
37
and
into
41.
AV
The
other
thing
I
wanted
to
talk
about
was
the
curve
in
the
road
on
Copeland
Street.
If
you
have
ever
driven
Copeland
Street
you
come
up,
it
is
a
straight
away.
It
banks
to
the
right
and
then
immediately
banks
to
the
left,
which
is
where
the
park
is,
which
is
where
this
proposed
driveway
exits
from.
If
you'd,
like
some
more
photos,
I
have
different
angles
to
share
with
you.
It
is
a
safety
hazard.
There
are
multiple
children
that
play
in
that
park.
You
cannot
see.
AV
AW
AY
Three
Montrose
Street
Roxbury
mass
over
109
opposes
project
I
sent
a
letter
in
with
some
aerial
views.
The
egress
is
about
243
feet,
which
is
80
yards
was
almost
a
football
field.
I
would
like
to
know
how
safely
this
the
safety
aspect
of
this
for
these
abutters
to
get
fire
vehicles
back
there.
If
it's
so
accessible,
the
purlins
Street,
they
should
move
the
driveway
to
Penn
Street.
BA
Hi,
my
name
is
Lorraine
wheeler
and
I'm
here
on
behalf
of
the
Neighborhood
Association
and
we're
real
I'm
really
here.
My
address
is
85
Moreland
Street
and
we're
really
here
to
support
the
of
others
who
clearly
have
issues
that
have
not
been
resolved.
Despite
the
fact
of
you
know
the
developer,
going
door-to-door
and
having
these
last
two
meetings
that
were
in
the
vicinity,
but
not
on
site,
because
you
can't
get
back
there
to
get
on
site
and
see
how
narrow
the
driveway
is.
BA
And
the
other
thing
I'd
like
to
say
is
that
this
owner
is
the
third
owner
to
own
both
Lots
together
and
that
Copeland
Street
Drive
is
the
only
entrance
on
Copeland
Street
and
where
he
doesn't
have
enough
frontage
to
build,
and
so
basically
they're
suggesting
to
build
eight
townhouses
behind
a
house.
And
so
naturally
that
was
something
that
the
you
know.
BA
The
residents
really
need
to
discuss
and,
as
was
pointed
out,
there
had
been
a
carriage
house
on
the
property
on
more
on
parent
Street,
which
was
demolished
by
this
developer
and
at
least
one
of
these
meetings,
one
of
the
residents,
because
they
have
these
real
safety
concerns
near
the
park
and
coming
out
that
really
what
you
would
call
a
blind
Drive
someone
suggested
well.
Why
can't
we
talk
about
having
the
driveway
come
out
through
that
lot?
BA
That's
now
vacant
and
you
can
still
build
a
single-family
house
if
that
is
what
you're
concerned
in,
but
they
are
parents
treat
there
really
is
enough
fun
tension.
So
because
you
know
there
was
an
opportunity
to
discuss
this
I'm
saying
that
we're
opposed
because
the
meeting
went
forward,
but
we
would
really
agree
with
the
councillors
who
have
said
that
it
should
be
deferred
for
these
additional
for
additional
community
meetings
that
are
not
on-site
standing
up.
So
thank
you.
BB
AP
C
AP
AP
A
C
BC
C
C
A
Next
case,
following
boa
eight
three
eight
zero
one,
seven
four
to
six
easement
street
Desmond,
Street
I'm.
Sorry,
the
applicant
proposes
to
construct
two
folk
Kim.
These
moms
each
contain
four
cellular
antennas,
as
well
as
one
dish
antenna
on
the
roof
of
the
building
at
sex.
Six
Esmond
Street
the
faux
chimneys
will
match
the
existing
brick
facade
of
the
building
violations.
Article
86
Section,
six,
the
rooftop
location
of
a
new
antenna,
is
conditional
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
Thank.
BD
BD
BD
BD
Than
paint,
typically,
what
the
installation
will
be
metal
corners
and
the
facades
of
the
faux
chimney
will
be
the
five
class
and
those
would
generally
he's
now.
They've
come
a
long
way
in
the
last
ten
years,
with
stealth
design
and
dipping
materials
that
I
just
painted
to
this,
the
chimneys
will
not
only
match
the
proposal
is
to
master
the
color
bright.
Now
we
could
also
match
the
texture.
BE
Good
morning
mr.
chair
members
of
the
board
Whitney
Celestine,
here
with
the
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood
Services,
we
held
in
a
butters
meeting
for
this
project
on
July
21st.
No
one
showed
up
to
the
abutters
meeting,
but
I
did
not
get
any
opposition
or
any
concerns
from
the
neighbors.
We
support
this
project.
Thank
you.
BC
A
Boa
eight
two:
three
six
three
six
one,
forty
one
to
one:
forty
five
North
Park
Street.
This
is
to
raise
one
forty-one,
Norfolk
Street,
single-story,
960
squiffed
square
feet
and
combine
for
the
six
Woodrow
AB
and
139
to
145
North,
Fort
Street
direct
to
new
stores
on
the
first
floor
at
four
units.
On
the
second
floor
and
a
four
units
on
the
third
floor,
145
mill,
Fort
Street
is
a
restaurant
with
36
a
take
out
curb
cut
on
Woodrow
AB
in
Norfolk
Street
to
accommodate
seven
to
ten
parking
spaces.
A
The
violations
article
60
section
40
Osprey
parking-
was
insufficient.
Article
60
section
8,
a
multi-family
dwelling
instability,
article
60,
section,
8,
takeout
restaurant
is
forbidden.
Article
60,
section
9.
A
lot
area
for
additional
dwelling
units
is
insufficient.
Article
60
section
9,
the
fluidy.
A
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
60,
section
9,
the
useable
open
space
is
insufficient.
Article
60,
section
ein
front
yard
is
insufficient.
Article
60,
section
9
side
yard
is
insufficient.
That
article
60
section
9
of
the
rail
yard
is
insufficient
name
an
address
for
the
racket.
Please.
Mr.
BF
BF
M
BF
Years
to
build
a
business
across
the
street,
making
a
long-term
commitment
to
the
neighborhood,
it's
her
desire
to
move
into
this.
This
parcel
that
she
owns
same
time
to
acquire
the
adjacent
parcels
and
she's
entered
into
an
agreement
with
DND
the
construction
of
eight
apartments,
four
of
which
will
be
affordable
and
that's
non
subsidized.
The
subsidy
in
this
case
occurs
with
it
with
a
bargain
purchase
of
the
land,
but
the
construction
is
being
done
completely
at
the
expense
of
the
owner.
The
other
four
units
will
be
market.
BF
All
eight
units
who
live
off
street
parking
is
provided
in
the
plan.
The
green
space
is
not
adequate
for
the
code,
but
there
is
green
space
in
what
is
a
very
performative
location
on
Norfolk
Street.
This
property
is
in
Dorchester,
but
it's
in
the
Matta
pian
district
zoning.
The
intersection
of
wardro
in
Norfolk
is
a
curve
which,
when
you
consolidate
these
these
watts,
it
gives
rise
to
the
red
a
classic
case
of
a
lot
which
is
difficult
in
shape,
and
there.
C
M
BF
Said
that
when
we
consolidate
these
lots,
given
the
angle
between
wardro
and
Norfolk,
we've
got
an
unusual
shape
lot.
It's
a
prominent
squad
on
North,
Clark,
Street
and
I
think
it
deserves
a
better
building
than
the
vacant
laws
that
are
there.
Now.
If
you
look
at
the
1933
Atlas,
which
I'm
not
going
to
ask
you
to
look
at
now,
each
one
of
these
Lots
did
have
a
commercial
building
on
it
and
through
the
years
to
neglect
no
one
ever
expected
the
city,
never
long.
Never,
my
daughter's
that
have
come
back
to
the
way
it
has.
BF
The
neighborhood
has
changed.
It
is
zoned
residential,
but
that
sony
was
in
place
in
1997.
At
that
time,
the
greener
rail
had
not
yet
been
restored.
The
got
just
a
zoning
did
not
come
into
play
until
2002
things
have
changed
in
this.
Neighborhood
has
really
taught
me
strong
and
that's
evidence,
that's
evidenced
by
the
association,
and
you
will
hear
from
the
Association
which
has
voted
in
support
and
also
from
summer
butters,
who
have
opposed
generally.
C
BF
Given
the
shape
of
a
lot
and
also
the
topography,
it's
essentially
impossible
to
build
something
in
compliance
with
the
code.
The
the
plan,
the
way
the
building
is
sited
I,
think
it's
the
best
compromise
to
make
adequate
use
of
the
property
and
also
to
provide
as
much
open
space
as
possible
within
reason,
and
also
to
meet
the
setback
inside
you
weren't,
where
it
can't
be
met,
it's
really
impossible
with
a
lot
of
this
shape
and
would
put
the
adjacent
streets
to
meet
the
code.
BF
Just
addressing
one
by
one
I
guess,
the
the
major
argument
here
in
support
of
a
variance
is
number
one.
The
reasonable
use
of
the
land
number
two:
it
is
compatible
with
what
is
around
it.
On
the
streetscape
on
ball,
four
one
would
vote.
This
is
a
fairly
major
commercial
street.
This
building
is
three
stories
which
is
excessive,
but
it's
35
feet
which
is
permitted
and
it
is
providing
much-needed
houses,
housing,
both
market
rate
and,
most
importantly,
the
affordable
piece
that
you
can
is
being
done
at
the
expense
of
the
owner.
BE
Good
morning
mr.
chair
Whitney
Celeste
in
here
with
the
mayor's
office,
mr.
chair
members
of
the
board
Whitney
Celeste
in
here
with
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services,
I,
held
a
nut
butters
meeting
for
this
project
on
July
17th.
It
is
also
my
understanding
that
the
applicant
I'm
india
butters
I've
met
with
the
neighbor
neighborhood
association,
which
is
talbot
norfolk
triangle
who
are
present
today.
BE
There's
been
a
lot
of
back
and
forth
and
they're
also
offering
for
affordable
units
out
of
the
eight
units
we
speak
in.
Support
of
this
project
and
I
also
received
a
letter
of
support
from
the
neighborhood
association,
who
also
held
a
vote
that
came
out
a
71%
support
for
this
project.
So
the
mayor's
office
supports
this.
Thank
you.
AJ
J
BG
BI
Good
afternoon,
Paul
Malcolm
is
from
15
Elmhurst
Street
a
resident.
Also
a
member
of
the
Talbot
Norfolk
Triangle
neighbors
United
steering
committee
was
briefly
mentioned.
This
was
probably
one
of
our
most
challenging
votes
in
our
14-year
history.
As
an
organization,
I
would
like
to
build
consensus
whenever
possible,
but
we
did
reach
the
point
that
we
as
a
neighborhood
needed
to
have
a
vote
in
other
73
votes
cast,
which
is
about
two
or
three
times
higher
than
we've
ever
had
cast
for
any
project
to
our
neighborhood.
As
mentioned,
71
percent
of
the
folks
said.
BI
That
said,
no
we
probably
do
have
some
traffic
concerns
there
about
the
portability
issue
and
then,
and
then
folks,
who
just
feel
like.
There's
too
many
folks
already
in
the
neighborhood,
so
depending
on
which
side
you
end
up
on
but
anyways.
In
short,
the
Neighborhood
Association
does
come
down
in
support
of
this
project
in
the
process
that
we
held
as
a
community.
K
Hi,
my
name
is
Marie
De
Niro
has
the
net
in
response
to
the
concerns
of
the
abutters.
Miss
jasmine
has
agreed
to
underground
parking
for
all
of
her
tenants,
so
she's
offering
six
point.
Five
spots
of
parking
increase,
green
space
changes
to
the
exterior
of
the
structure,
relocation
of
the
stuff
dump
dumpster
rat
abatement.
That
would
include
the
abutters
property
as
well:
local
landscape,
landscape
company,
with
civic
association,
assisting
in
bed
lighting
on
camera
security
and
the
driveway
entrance
that
would
have
been
on
wood
drill
is
now
on
North
Oak
Street.
K
C
BJ
Sir,
my
name
is
cherry
Xena
on
114
or
Fox
tree.
That's,
where
solid
is
right.
Now
it
does
cross
the
street
that
land
I
bet
on
it
three
times
the
city
never
give
it
to
me.
They
tell
me
was
too
small
to
build
on
it
on
the
1980
and
I
decided
to
leave
it
alone
and
black.
Something
comment
on
the
neighborhood,
but
I.
Just
too
much
traffic
gonna
be
on
that
neighborhood,
because
my
restaurants
still
gonna
be
cross
the
street.
BJ
AW
BK
Hello,
my
name
is
thank
you,
members
of
the
Zoning
Board.
My
name
is
Ruby
Reyes
I'm,
a
director
butter,
homeowner
and
occupant
for
the
proposed
development
I'm
opposed
to
it,
I'm
asking
for
a
deferral,
I
purchased
and
moved
into
my
home
in
December,
2013
I'm,
a
Boston
resident
of
22
years,
and
a
landlord
that
offers
real,
affordable
housing,
not
as
a
business
business
owner,
but
as
a
Boston
resident
I'm
opposed
to
the
development,
because
it
will
harm
my
dwelling
and
make
my
quality
of
life
and
those
of
the
other
director
butters
more
difficult.
BK
My
main
concerns
are
the
main
concerns
of
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals
listed
in
the
zoning
code,
variances,
which
are
9.
These
zoning
codes
are
put
into
place
to
protect
residents
like
myself
from
dwelling
harm
and
to
preserve
the
quality
of
life
in
Boston.
The
space
that
is
being
proposed
to
build
on
is
not
large
enough
for
the
proposed
development
it's
excessive
in
size,
and
that
has
been
the
direct
result
of
what
has
caused
much
of
the
opposition
to
to
this
development.
BK
We
when
we
went
and
met
with
other
directive
butters
as
well,
we
asked
them
to
vote
on
the
process,
many
of
them
of
support,
affordable
housing
and
that's
why
they
were
in
support
of
it
when
we
explained
to
them
that
the
portable
housing
would
be
at
a
70%
AMI,
which
is
a
family
of
four
making
$75,000,
they
were
directly
to
pose.
They
didn't
understand
that
affordable
housing
was
for
folks
that
made
$75,000.
That
area
has
a
median
income
of
about
55
to
56
thousand
dollars
a
year.
BK
The
affordable,
the
proposed,
affordable
housing
isn't
affordable
for
that
area.
Many
of
the
residents
that
we
spoke
to
were
we're
wanting
to
see
more
people
have
access
to
who
have
vouchers
to
be
able
to
move
into
that
space.
I
explained
that
that's
probably
not
going
to
be
possible
with
the
70%
AMI,
so
those
are
some
of
the
opposition
concerns
that
are
around
affordable
housing
for
myself
as
a
director,
but
er
I
am
opposed
to
it,
because
I
believe
that
there
will
be
major
water
damage
to
my
home
and
excess
of
water
flooding
in
that
Street.
BK
There's
currently
a
great
deal
of
soil
there.
There's
five
trees:
all
of
that
will
be
taken
out
in
support
of
of
this
development
and
that
will
directly
impact
the
water.
The
water
flow
in
that
area.
I
do
I
did
ask
the
developer
to
increase
the
amount
of
inches
of
water
retained
under
the
building
through
standard
development
practices.
I
was
told
that
they
would
only
use
standard
development
practices,
so
that
was
an
area
of
negotiation
that
I
really
was
hoping
wouldn't
harm
the
entire
neighborhood
with
more
water
damage.
BK
Some
of
the
other
things
that
directly
impact
my
home,
sorry,
ISM,
it's
just
the
the
excessive
space
being
used.
We've
gone
back
and
forth.
I
will
say
that
/
I
asked
to
meet
with
them,
starting
in
August.
We
didn't
meet
until
October
5th.
After
a
Department
of
Neighborhood
Development
eating
with
the
TNT
Association
on
October
5th,
we
asked
for
the
ami
to
be
lowered
to
50.
We
were
told
no.
C
BK
So,
just
to
wrap
up
really
quickly.
This
is
the
church
which
is
also
directly
about
directly
abutting
the
property.
The
proposed
wall
will
go
right
up
to
the
green
space,
essentially
creating
a
hallway.
Like
effect
for
that
church,
we've
asked
for
easement
area
and
it's
it's
gonna,
create
safety
concerns
right
here
in
front
of
that
church.
Our
public
parking
spots
that
are
also
going
to
be
gone.
We
were
presented
with
two
different
plans.
BK
We
really
thought
we
could
push
for
one
that
was
never
even
considered
it
was
just
proposed
to
us,
so
we
would
be
willing
to
negotiate
as
we
come
together
and
I'm
asked
repeatedly
for
meetings,
but
unfortunately,
the
things
that
are
really
important
to
us
or
green
space.
These
are
publicly
owned
parcels
that
are
being
given
up,
so
the
community
benefits
need
to
be
maximized,
I
think.
AO
This
is
the
you
might
have
to
find
Amina,
but
then
the
diagram
of
the
developments.
You
can
see
that
the
driveway
is
directly
by
that
church
that
she
mentioned,
and
so
the
children
are
usually
come
out
and
have
been
fighting
in
that
green
space.
Now
they're
gonna
be
right
against
a
driveway
just
feet
from
their
property,
which
is
going
to
cause
safety
concerns,
and
so
the
issues
around
lecture,
the
side
yard
in
excess
of
anything
are
it's
gonna,
bring
in
more
concerns
or
traffic
on
a
really
busy
intersection.
AO
The
excessive
density
of
the
building
is
also
going
to
contribute
to
problems
around
light.
We
haven't
gotten
any
shadow
studies
or
traffic
studies
of
what's
gonna
happen
in
any.
Whatever
I
have
there's
plants
inside
the
building
facing
the
windows.
That's
gonna
be
decreased
in
sunlight,
as
well
as
the
garden
ability
to
do
respective
gardening,
for
example.
So
those
are
some
of
the
concerns
of
my
old
dad
over
here
with
us
and
exercise
for
deferral.
So
we
can
just
have
conversations
to
figure
out
an
agreement.
BF
As
far
as
the
church
is
concerned,
that
was
brought
up
actually
as
far
as
hearsay,
but
just
since
it's
it's
gotten
in
the
church
is
on
a
trapezoidal
shape
a
lot
much
frontage
on
Milton
Avenue
as
it
does
on
or
fourth
Street,
there's
green
space
in
pocket
on
that
side.
Most
of
the
activity
is
not
adjacent
to
the
subject
possible.
BF
I
agree
that
good
neighbors
should
act
as
good
neighbors
and
I've
had
conversation
to
that
effect,
that
over
time,
if
this
project
is
permitted
and
deponent
does
move
in
she'll
become
a
neighbor
and
they
can
work
things
out,
but
we
can't
do
anything
formally,
which
it
impact,
titled
liability
and
all
the
other
issues
that
normally
come
up
as
far
as
the
flooding
it's
good.
It's
constantly
been
raised.
Water
management
is
a
function
of
the
coordinate.
BF
Is
an
engineering
solution
to
that
this
site
is
also
elevated,
probably
15
feet
from
200
feet
away
with
a
wardrobe
Avenue
passes.
Underneath
the
adjacent
commuter
rail
tracks.
It's
not
an
area,
that's
long
to
be
prone
to
flooding.
The
only
issue
is
the
management
of
the
water
on
this
site,
and
that
will
be
done
in
accordance
with
the
code
and
good
engineering
and
design
practice.
M
J
C
A
Your
next
case
calling
boa
eight
five,
nine
two
four
one,
forty
eight
Prescott
Street.
This
is
a
direct,
a
new
single-family
dwelling
proposed
to
off
street
parking
violations.
Article
69
section,
eight,
a
lot
areas,
insufficient
article,
sixty
nine
section,
nine
lot
width
is
insufficient
article,
sixty
nine
section
I
and
a
lot
of
frontage
is
insufficient.
Article
69,
section
nine
in
the
front
yard,
is
insufficient
name
an
address
for
the
record.
Please
good.
R
Afternoon
attorney
John
Paul
Jeanne
on
behalf
of
the
developer
Lori
o
Mahoney,
who
is
sitting
here
with
me
before
you
is
to
build
a
single-family
house
on
a
5,000
square
foot
lot.
The
house
size
is
2052
square
feet.
It
is
consistent
with
every
other
house
on
the
street
if
you
guys
know
Prescott,
Street
and
I
pocket
fronts,
the
train
tracks
off
of
Wolcott
Square,
going
down
the
list
of
properties.
Every
single
house,
including
some
of
them
multi-family
two
and
three
units
are
on
five
thousand
or
square
five
thousand
square
feet
or
less
lot
size.
R
The
violations,
as
mr.
fortune
just
read
out
all
come
down
to
the
five
thousand
as
opposed
to
six
thousand.
So
it's
a
lot
furnished
lot
with,
as
far
as
to
mention
a
requirements,
side,
yard
and
things
like
that
we
meet
all
the
requirements
are
FA
are
is
under
five
is
allowed
point
four.
As
the
proposal
parking,
everything
complies
with
Sony.
BL
Good
afternoon
chair
members
of
the
board,
Brian
Flynn
with
the
mayor's
office
and
Neighborhood
Services
by
representing
high
pack,
we
did
hold
it
on-site
about
his
meeting.
Although
the
abutters
were
opposed
to
the
project,
our
office
does
offer
our
full
support,
as
we
do
feel,
there's
adequate
space
and
it's
only
a
single
family.
So
our
office
would
like
to
offer
our
support.
M
BM
BN
Today
and
every
reason
we
oppose
a
we
being
The
Apprentice,
because
I'll
be
apart
of
that
amount
of
poverty,
has
approached
it
and
we're
concerned
about
parking
the
parking
that
they're
doing,
because
all
the
way
to
the
rear
of
the
building,
which
is
not
consistent
with.
What's
the
rest
on
screen
and
in
addition
to
that,
it's
no
credit
card.
So
there
will
be
why
they're
creating
our
street
parking
for
their
property
they're,
creating
a
problem
with
on
street
parking.
R
R
J
A
V
Good
afternoon
mr.
chair
members
of
the
board
attorney
Nix
Azula,
McDermott
quilty
and
Miller
28
State
Street
Suite
8:02,
here
in
Boston
with
me
to
my
left,
is
Tim
Loranger
from
embarq
studio
who's.
The
architect
in
the
project
to
my
right
is
Mark.
Sexy,
30,
thorne
LLC,
who
is
the
developer
on
the
project?
We've
passed
out
some
materials
and
plans
for
your
review
as
I
briefly
go
through
the
project.
I
know
it's
been
a
long
day.
Xxx
thorn
Street
is
a
Hyde
Park
neighborhood
of
Boston
the
site
is
approximately
10,000
821
square
feet.
V
It's
been
long
vacant
overgrown
and
underutilized.
It's
located
near
the
end
of
a
dead-end
street
thorn
streets,
a
dead-end
street
that
dead
ends
at
the
top
against
the
VHA,
Hassan
apartment
building,
and
it's
just
off
of
River
Street,
which
is
a
main
thoroughfare
between
Matapan
and
Hyde
Park,
where
there
are
numerous
multi-family
residential
buildings
along
River
Street,
it's
a
little
bit
of
a
unique
sight.
V
It
actually
has
no
rear
butters
at
rear
of
butts
to
the
rear
against
the
MBTA
commuter
rail
tracks
for
the
Franklin
and
fairmount
line,
and
it
has
a
sight,
great
change
of
about
10
feet
from
the
thorns
from
the
River
Street
entrance
to
thorne
Street,
all
the
way
up
to
the
top
of
where
the
Hassan
apartment
building
is
and
even
further
beyond
that
is
an
alpine
village
condo
association.
So
it
kind
of
goes
up.
V
The
hill
and
the
building
and
the
property
is
along
that
hill,
the
appellant
they
recently
purchased
this
site,
as
well
as
the
adjacent
existing
buildings
at
10
and
20
thorn
Street
and
two
buildings
on
River
Street,
so
they
now
have
kind
of
a
portfolio
in
the
neighborhood
and
this
this
property
was
never
developed.
Although
those
other
buildings
were
built
in
the
1960s
for
various
reasons,
this
kind
of
third
parcel
in
the
10
20
and
30
thorn
Street
was
never
developed.
V
Those
buildings
were
built
in
the
60s
and
have
10
and
20
thorn
contained
32
drawing
units.
So
the
proposal
that
we
have
in
front
of
the
board
today,
it's
our
Clady
small
project,
review
project.
It's
six
story:
building
45
rental
units,
including
six
affordable
units
at
70%,
ami,
the
unit
matrix
or
breakdown
as
15
Studios
15,
one
bedrooms,
ten,
two
bedrooms
and
five
three
bedrooms.
So
there
is
a
nice
mix
and
variant
variable
between
the
unit
Condit's,
not
ologist,
studios
and
one
beds.
V
V
It
also
includes
grounds
for
common
space
of
a
420
square
foot,
common
space
area
in
the
lobby,
trash
room,
on-site
and
related
improvements
in
landscaping,
site
design,
pedestrian
access,
all
up
and
down
thorn
Street
as
a
developer
owns
the
adjacent
properties,
a
ten
and
twenty
thorn.
This
will
allow
them
to
kind
of
complete
the
overall
development
of
these
three
neighboring
properties
and
allow
for
a
fully
cohesive
and
established
residential
program
on
thorn,
Street
and
they've,
committed
to
making
landscape
upgrades
and
other
site
improvements
all
along
that
site.
V
Thorin's
street,
along
with
the
project,
briefly
again,
we
did
engage
in
extensive
a
lengthy
community
process,
including
our
own
informal
about
our
meeting,
which
we
held
in
the
neighborhood.
We
met
with
the
East
River
Street
Neighborhood
Association
on
three
separate
occasions,
and
the
project
you
see
before
you
today
is
as
a
result
of
that,
and
we
do
appreciate
their
involvement
in
the
project.
They
did
provide
a
letter
of
support
in
the
packet
which
I
handed
out
earlier
today.
V
We
met
with
the
asan
apartment
buildings
as
well,
which
is
at
the
top
of
the
hill,
and
we
held
a
public
meeting
and
Anna
butter
meeting
as
a
result
of
the
article
ad
small
project
review
and
we
were
approved
by
the
BPD
a
last
month
on
September
13th.
Finally,
I'll
say
that
the
multi-family
residential
use
it's
an
allowed
use,
so
we're
not
looking
for
a
use
variance
here.
It's
an
allowed
use
in
the
zoning
sub
district
I'm
happy
to
go
over
the
zoning
relief
required
and
how
we
comply
with
the
variance
findings.
BL
Good
afternoon
Brian
Flynn
with
mayonnaise,
often
neighborhood
services,
I
like
to
go
on
record
in
support
of
this
proposal.
We
had
multiple
meetings,
especially
with
the
East
River
Civic
Association,
which
encompasses
the
region
where
the
proposals
being
held,
and
we
want
to
offer
our
full
support
for
the
project.
BM
Z
C
A
Consolidate
assess
this
fossil,
currently
37
pond
circle
and
subdivided
into
two
lots.
A
and
B
has
shown
in
the
subdivision
after
the
subdivision
rot
a
is
now
to
have
21,000
154
square
feet
and
he
addresses
to
be
known
as
37
pond
circle.
What
B's
to
now
have
10,000
square
feet
and
the
adjusters
to
be
known
as
35
pond
circle.
This
is
also
to
confirm
li,
who
use
a
knock
using
an
existing
one,
family
building
on
lot,
B
and
subdivision
plan
as
one
family
building
no
work
to
be
done,
violations
article
55
such
a
nine.
BO
Leary
50
Franklin
Street
Council
for
the
applicant
with
me,
is
our
Lucas
with
his
wife,
Eleanor
Lucas
have
lived
at
this
address
or
that's
30
years.
There's
a
singular
variance
required
what
they
want
to
do
here.
They
would
presently
have
a
30,
1154
Squidward
watt
on
one
circle.
Up
once
we
detect
the
plane
they
are
seeking
to
and
some
chips
you're
trying
to
build.
A
smaller
house
themselves
said
something
about
it,
consolidated
a
lot
and
subdivided
into
two
Lots.
BO
BO
AG
C
A
You
calling
VOA
eight
to
six
two
one,
one:
ninety
three
West
Chester
Road.
This
is
a
constructing
new
two-story
kitchen
kitchen
addition
array
of
the
existing
home
and
expand
living
space
into
the
basement.
The
violations,
article
55
section
9,
the
phylidia
ratio-
is
excessive
in
article
55,
section
9,
the
rear
yard
isn't
sufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record
place.
BQ
BQ
AG
AH
A
The
last
case
of
10:30,
it's
now
2
o'clock,
we're
going
pretty
good,
calling
boa
8400
7:00
to
3:00
to
7:00
Washington
Street.
This
is
a
demolition
of
an
existing
commercial
office
building
at
gas
station
erect
a
five-story
115
unit
residential
building
with
one
below
grade
level
of
parking.
This
is
car
sharing
service,
six
coffee,
six
cot
spaces
at
first
floor
retail,
a
violation
of
Article
51,
section
16,
a
multi-family
dwelling
is
conditional
nautical
51
section
16
the
cash
sharing
six
car
spaces
is
forbidden,
Article,
51,
section
17
the
floor.
The
a
ratio
is
excessive.
A
BS
BS
Mr.
chairman
and
members
board,
my
name
is
Mel
Schumann
189,
Elliott
Street
in
Brookline
I
am
the
legal
for
the
developer
was
one
of
them
was
today.
Justin
trims
also
have
the
architecture
of
the
project
James
Gray
from
stand.
Tech
tears.
Well,
we'll
try
to
be
brief.
Thank
you.
The
project
is
lovely,
as
you
have
these
materials
there.
It's
located
on
Washington
Street
at
the
corner
of
Quarry
Road,
the
Whole
Foods
supermarket,
is
cross
streets
eponymous
up
Quarry
Hill.
BS
Basically,
this
project
has
been
germinating
for
a
long
time,
so
we're
very
excited
to
be
here
today,
although
we
were
probably
a
little
more
excited
a
few
hours
ago,
but
you
were
fit
as
well.
In
any
event,
we're
seeking
to
the
project
I'll
run
quickly
through
it.
We
need
a
conditional
use
permit
for
residential
use,
the
appropriate
location
for
residential
use,
their
residences
all
around
it.
BS
We
also
need
variances
well.
The
first
variance
we
need
is
for
a
car
sharing
service
like
Zipcar,
which
is
something
really
that
people
wanted
in
the
project,
but
it's
treated
like
a
car
rental
agency,
so
it's
actually
a
forbidden
use.
So
we
also
need
a
variance
for
that.
We
need
a
variance
with
the
fa
r,
which
is
2.5
5,
that
required
fa
r
is
1
for
height,
which
is
at
69
feet,
11
inches
the
requirements
35,
we
have
no
mere
yard
and
there
is
a
20
foot
yacht
rear
yard
requirements.
BS
BS
J
BT
BT
We
also
made
reductions
in
height
and
we
also
made
reductions
in
the
massing
of
the
building
to
take
corners
where
there
was
community
impacts
or
concerns
of
the
neighborhood,
and
we
brought
those
down
those
around
the
corners
in
Yolo
and
the
one
piece
that
we
did
through
the
process
also
was
made
the
election
to
go
to
18%
on
the
affordable,
a
16%
I'm,
sorry
for
a
total
of
18
units
on
the
affordable
housing.
Providing
additional
for
the
units
are
broken.
Apologies
beat.
BU
C
BT
BV
BX
AS
BR
Pavement
a
long
term
brighton
resident
also
worked
in
the
area.
16:37
Commonwealth
I'll.
Keep
this
brief
and
respect
to
everyone
here.
I've
been
at
every
meeting,
along
with
every
board
meeting
I've
every
concern
I
feel
evolved
in
satisfactorily
addressed
by
the
developer
in
terms
of
height
in
terms
of
frontage
for
the
building
which
I
believe
came
up,
the
car-sharing
was
actually
brought
up
by
us
in
order
to
give
a
green
impact
on
the
building
and
reduce
traffic
I.
BR
BY
BY
So
the
IG,
the
majority,
the
IG,
did,
support
this
project
because
they
did
agree
to
go
up
on
the
affordable
units.
We
did
want
condos
that
wasn't
a
possibility
with
this
project,
so
the
fact
that
they
did
go
up
on
the
affordability
did
help
us
to
come
to
support
on
it
and
helping
increase
the
quarry
Road,
making
it
a
larger
sidewalk,
because
there's
a
lot
of
elderly
housing
in
that
corner
was
very
important
and
they
did
agree
to
that.
The
BAI
a
we
voted
not
to
support
it
and
that
was
prior
to
them.
BY
BZ
My
name's
Michael
Clarke
I,
also
served
on
the
I
AG,
just
want
to
speak
in
support
of
the
project
felt
the
developers
were
very
responsive
to
the
requests
of
the
ihe,
specifically
in
response
to
design
and
streetscape
considerations.
This
project
would
represent
a
massive
improvement
over
the
existing
site
itself,
which
is
currently
mostly
a
service
station.
A
lot
of
housing
pressure
exists
on
existing
residents
of
Brighton
they
and
introducing
over
100
units
in
the
neighbourhood
will
help
a
lot
of.
In
my
opinion,
middle
income
and
middle
income.
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
C
C
C
C
A
18
you
let
them
know
John,
you
gonna
defer,
you
wanna,
do
your
pearl
first
sure,
so
when
I
call
them
for
the
Reckitt
boa
eight
five,
two
four
one:
five:
seventy
two:
seventy
to
beat
Oakland
street
there's
a
companion
case,
boa
eighty
five,
two,
four
one:
nine.
Seventy
four,
the
74
be
Oakland
street
name
an
address
for
the
record
players
attorney.
R
C
A
Have
a
date
of
eleven
thirteen
2018
at
11:30?
Well
going
in
this
case,
I
did
I
just
call
the
a
mystery,
no
calling
it
did.
They
call
it
in
in
here,
I'm
gonna
call
boa
eight
four,
nine
six,
seven
eight
to
62
to
68
a
Mary
Street,
there's
also
a
companion
case,
boa
eight
four:
nine,
six,
seven
four
266
to
266
a
a
mystery.
This
is
for
two
62
to
68
renovate
an
existing
single-family
house,
a
proposed
second-story
addition:
the
violation
is
article
55,
section
nine.
The
lot
was
is
insufficient.
A
Article
55
section
I
on
the
floor
da
ratios,
excessive
article
55,
section,
nine
usable
open
space
is
insufficient.
Article
55,
section
nine
side
yard
is
insufficient.
55
section
nine,
the
rear
yard
is
it's
official.
This
is
for
266
266
a
Amy
street.
This
is
erect
a
new
five
unit,
residential
building
the
violation
article
29,
section
8.
This
is
in
the
tpod
enforcement
article.
55
section
for
a
street
parking
is
insufficient.
An
article
55
section
40,
Marty
Park
and
design
I've
got
55
section
8,
a
multi-family
dwelling
is
forbidden.
A
Article
55
section
I
in
a
lot
area
for
walling
unit
is
insufficient
nautical
55
section
9,
the
fluid
a
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
55,
section
I
on
the
usable
open
space
is
insufficient.
Article
55,
section
I
in
the
front
yard,
is
insufficient.
Article
55
section
9
aside
yacht
is
efficient
in
article
55
section
9.
The
rear
yard
is
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
attorney.
R
R
Both
of
these
projects,
I,
have
provided
the
board
to
letters
of
support
from
the
Jamaica
Plain
neighborhood
zoning
Council,
which
we
obtained
through
the
cable
process
with
respect
to
2
6
th
Street.
This
is
basically
renovating
an
existing
sink
fit
a
single
family
with
a
proposed
second-story
addition.
R
The
lot
width
is
required.
45
word
42
35.7,
with
1.66,
open
space,
601,
71
square
feet,
side,
yard,
7,
foot
and
then
10
foot,
where
5.3
and
19
feet
and
Marriott's
15
feet
were
at
39,
went
to
a
community
process
again,
as
I
stated
we
met
with
butter,
is
the
most
community
group
several
times
gave
them
the
proposal
the
and
we're
able
to
contain
their
support.
This
project.
C
R
R
With
266
Thema
Street
businesses,
you
build
a
new
five
unit,
residential
building
their
zoning.
In
that
neighborhood,
there's
three
out.
Four
thousand
voters:
lot:
sizes,
3969
again
at
the
off
point:
seven,
where
at
one
point
six
six
height
is
thirty:
five,
where
forty
point
seven
modal
is
front:
yards
fifteen
feet
or
modal,
we're
at
eight
feet;
seven
and
ten
on
the
side
where
seven
three
point:
six
and
rear
yachts.
Fifteen,
where
eight
point
eight,
the
parking
in
that
neighborhood
is
one
point,
two
five
per
unit,
which
would
be
six
point
two
five
for
this.
R
We
have
proposed
five
spaces:
the
unit
sizes.
If
you
wanted
to
know
that
unit
ones,
978
square
feet
to
bed
one
bath,
either
two
thousand
six
square
feet
to
bed:
two
bath
unit:
three
thousand
sixty
eight
square
feet
to
bed
two
bath
unit;
four
thousand
six
square
feet
to
bed:
two
bath
and
unit
five
thousand
ninety
seven
square
feet:
two-bedroom
baths.
We
went
again
to
the
Jaypee.
AW
AG
AH
A
This
is
a
take
down
an
existing
single-family
structure
in
place
it
with
five-unit
building
and
under
under
building
parking
violation.
Article
50,
section
Claudia
off
street
parking
is
insufficient.
Article
55
section
8,
a
multi-family
dwelling
is
forbidden,
article
55,
section
9,
a
lot
area
for
additional
drawing
units
is
insufficient
by
section
9
or
the
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
55,
section
9
use
development
space
is
insufficient.
Article
55,
section
9
in
the
front
yard,
is
insufficient.
Article
55
section
I
in
the
side
yard,
isn't
revision
an
article
55
section
9
array
is
insufficient.
R
John
15:10
Forbes
Road
in
Braintree
with
me,
and
it's
Dave,
Anderson
who's,
the
owner
developer
of
this
proposal,
so
that
you
remember,
came
before
we
actually
had
a
deferral
before
we
were
at
five
units
at
that
time
to
the
community
process.
We
have
reduced
this
project
to
three
units,
three
units
which
is
before
you
right
now.
I
have
provided
toward
the
letter
of
support
from
the
Jamaica
Plain
neighborhood
Zoning
Council.
The
proposal
is
lots
of
it's
a
three
or
four
thousand
zoning,
and
the
lot
size
is
four
thousand
six
hundred.
Eighty
eight.
C
R
M
AH
Z
A
The
next
two
cases
calling
VOA
7
9
6
2,
1,
4,
8,
Pine
Street,
there's
a
companion
case;
VOA
7
9,
6,
2
1
to
8
Rhea,
Pine
Street.
This
is
for
8
pine,
the
building
a
second
bill
and,
on
the
same
lot,
no
work
to
be
done.
The
violations,
article
69
section
29,
our
street
parking
loading.
A
requirement
is
packing
as
insufficient.
Radical
69,
section,
thirty
point,
one
to
two
or
more
dwellings.
On
the
same
lot,
article
69
section,
nine,
the
rail
yard-
is
insufficient.
A
This
is
for
a
fine
demo,
the
existing
bond
and
rebuild
a
single-family
dwelling
on
one
of
one
of
two
villains.
On
this
lot,
the
violations,
article
69
section,
twenty
nine
point:
four
RS
tree
parking
location,
article,
69,
section,
30,
69,
30,
point
one:
two:
buildings
on
one
lot:
article
69
69
lot
frontages
insufficient
article
69,
section,
I
use
all
the
spaces
in
sufficient
article,
69
section.
Nine
side
gathers
a
nutrition
in
article
69,
section
nine
Raya,
this
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record
place.
BW
BW
We
are
again
seeking
a
similarly
different
applicant
different
circumstances
as
in
the
past,
while
the
intention
of
the
project
is
the
same,
this
garage
was
previously
part
of
the
property
with
an
adjacent
property
from
a
we
can
tell
based
upon
the
design.
It
was
then
incorporated
into
the
wood
Hill
condominium
as
unit
four
of
the
condominium.
It
currently
sits
on
the
wood
Hill
condominium
plant.
The
barn
is
for
lack
of
a
better
term
falling
apart.
It
is
the
residence
of
rodents
and
raccoons
and
it
desperately
needs
care
and
attention.
It's
an
eyesore.
BW
It's
a
hazard
and
needs
work.
Press
live
in
the
applicant
before
you
investigated.
What
could
be
done
to
restore
this
pond
and
essentially,
as
you
can
see
in
the
pictures
before
you,
which
is
why
I
want
to
present
that
there's
really
nothing?
Much
that
can
be
done.
The
relief
that's
being
sought
today.
While
there
are
several
variances,
the
actual
extent
of
the
variances
are
pretty
insignificant.
We
have
a
FA
are
over
into
0.05,
keep
in
mind.
This
is
a
structure.
That's
already
there.
It
was
being
used
for
storage
in
the
past.
BW
The
rear
setback
is
the
most
significant
of
the
variances.
Being
requested,
however,
suggests
that
that's
mitigated
by
the
fact
that
there's
severe
downslope
and
behind
the
line,
the
property
behind
this
is
also
in
the
residential
zone,
which
is
essentially
being
used
as
a
junkyard,
as
you
can
see
from
the
picture
and
that
there
is
a
another
residence
behind
it,
which
is
a
double
log
use
just
like
we
are
intending
to
do
here
with
a
auto
body.
Repair
shop,
that's
changed
uses
over
the
past,
but
that
is
a
non-conforming
use
also
in
the
residential
district.
BW
There's
one
additional
parking
space,
that's
being
added,
but
right
now
the
residence
uses
three.
So
in
essence,
we're
having
one
parking
space
for
this
single-family
use.
I'd
suggest
to
you
that
this
is
an
unusual
lot,
based
upon
the
fact
that
there
is
the
significance
of
the
area,
the
fact
that
there's
the
pinch
point
in
front,
that's
encumbered
by
an
easement,
this
isn't
a
reasonable
use.
This
is
a
residential
area,
we're
attempting
to
add
another
residence
for
a
family
in
this
neighborhood
that
we
minimal
impact
upon
the
surrounding
community.
It's
tucked
into
the
rear.
BW
A
family
will
certainly
have
less
impact
than
a
barn,
whatever
the
use
of
a
barn
might
be
in
today's
age,
if
they
do
want
to
actually
use
it
for
what
its
intended
purposes
are
its
permanent
purposes.
Today,
just
the
project
which
mr.
Lydon
is
placed
before
you
is
reasonable
and
would
have
minimal
impact,
and
it
is
a
more
fair
use
of
the
code
considering
that
it's
creating
a
non-conforming
use
into
a
performing
district.
You.
BW
Know
the
circumstances
of
the
a
while
back
for
a
discussion.
At
this
point
there
was
a
desire
to
propose
a
landscaping
plan
which
I
did
pass
up.
As
you
can
see,
the
applique
is
going
to
line
the
abutting
property
with
our
bodies.
There
are
some
opponents
to
the
project
well,
I
did
hand
out
several
letters
of
support
from
the
mainly
owners
of
the
actual
condominium
on
the
lot.
Who,
in
theory,
are
the
most
impacted
by
this
project.
They'd
love
to
see
this.
BW
This
happened
to
her
here
once
going
to
speak
to
you,
one
unfortunately
had
to
leave
the
directive
on
into
the
left
is
neutral.
He
informed
us
that
he
did
originally
signed
an
opposition
letter,
but
did
so
and
changed
his
mind.
He
remains
neutral
at
this
point,
but
the
main
opposition
is
coming
from
the
property
which
is
actually
two
houses
over,
but
has
the
yard
that
shares
the
back
and
be
property
down
the
hill,
like
the
excess
flow
from
the
auto
body
repair
and
the
dual
lot
and
I'm
expecting
they'll
here.
E
So
the
property
was
owned
for
a
while
included
in
the
property,
the
front
building
of
the
condominium
and
the
back
door.
I
guess
what
I'm
trying
to
get
to?
Is
this
a
simple
case
of
demolition
by
neglect?
That
is
that
collectively
everybody
just
let
the
bond
fall
apart
than
to
be
able
to
come
here
and
say:
oh,
it's
fine
talk
about
their
former
status,
so.
BW
I
can
tell
you
a
little
bit
of
the
history.
There
was
an
owner
that
was
an
absentee
owner
that
was
using
the
buyer.
We
think
for
automobile
collection
restorations
at
those.
Unfortunately,
the
gentleman
failed
to
pay
its
condominium
fees.
There
was
a
long,
drawn-out
litigation
about
to
foreclose
on
us
he's
not
part
of
this.
BW
The
unit
of
the
condominium
has
based
conduct,
so
what
one
of
the
reasons
that
the
condominium
interpreter
on
this
to
the
provincial
residence
present
check
must
be
the
income
as
an
association
which
is
also
madness
in
the
parachute
itself.
Okay,
so
the
injection
of
honking
loud
Association,
has
been
complete
landscaping
effort
with
the
entire.
BW
BL
Good
afternoon,
members
of
the
board
Brian
Flynn
with
the
Mays
office
of
neighborhood
services,
I,
want
to
go
on
record
in
support
of
this
proposal.
We
did
our
office
did
receive
a
a
letter
with
13
signatures
in
opposition
to
the
project.
With
that
being
said,
it
was
originally
deferred,
as
privacy
was
a
the
main
complaint
stated
by
the
residents.
I
do
feel
that
in
good
faith
they
have
reached
back
out
and
they
made
adequate
changes
to
the
landscape
design
with
increased
greenery
privacy.
Bushes
things
like
that
that
we
do
feel
is
reasonable.
BH
BH
Unfortunately,
the
people
that
were
living
on
the
second
and
third
floor,
it's
just
a
truck
with
back
wheel.
We
all
own,
didn't,
have
the
money
to
get
rid
of
this
guy
I
had
to
take
my
money,
bring
this
guy
to
court
just
to
get
him
out
of
it.
So
obviously,
you
know
I
inherited
somewhat
of
a
mess
now.
BH
He
basically
so
when
that
happened,
I
met
mr.
Lyon
very
responsible.
The
best
bet
turned
this
into
a
small
house:
we're
not
talking
about
Strasse
T.
Above
you
know
three
or
four
level.
Building
it's
not
a
big
deal.
We
have
a
huge
driveway,
there's
plenty
of
party.
My
neighbors
are
objecting
to
there's
no
parking
plenty
of
parking
and
Mike
in
our
tribe,
I
should
say
pine
tree.
Some.
BH
Are
that
the
the
barniz
is
gonna
cost
create
too
much
noise
for
the
construction
either
way
it's
coming
down.
It's
about
to
fall
down,
so
we're
doing
the
right
thing.
I'm
gonna
try
to
make
it
into
a
family.
Some
of
my
neighbors
are
opposed
and
they
don't
want
a
family
yeah.
That's
what
they
said.
I
have
another
guy
in
our
position,
who
wants
to
make
him
into
a
pot
bomb.
BH
M
BH
BG
Afternoon,
mr.
chairman,
members
of
the
board,
Joseph
Easter
from
the
law
firm
of
McKenzie
&
Associates
183
State
Street
Boston
I've
made
reservations
at
the
hotel
for
all
of
you.
As
late
as
the
Disney
Afternoon
I
heard.
What
counsel
for
the
developer
has
made
I'm
representing
a
number
of
the
of
the
abutters,
and
there
are
some
here
to
speak
and
I
know
what
the
benefit
of
time.
BG
The
interest
of
time
we
will
probably
have
one
person
speaking
and
put
the
other
names
on
the
record,
for
you
counsel
seems
to
suggest
what
it's
two
things
of
its
GST
I
know
that,
historically,
this
board
has
been
in
opposition
to
porkchop
Lots.
That's
what
this
one
is.
This
has
been
a
matter.
That's
been
brought
before
the
board
in
some
form,
is
so
fashioned
by
various
individuals
since
1999
and
in
each
instance
either
was
denied
or
entirely
it
was
withdrawn.
BG
So
there's
some
evidence
that
it
turns
if
this
has
been
something
that
and
efforts
have
been
made
in
order
to
do
this.
While
folks
are
sympathetic
to
the
fact
that
the
bond
exists
there
and
that
the
condominium
association
ordered
leader
developer
would
like
to
do
something
for
it
to
it,
the
reality
is
that
if
it's
an
eyesore,
then
it
is
something
that
should
be
taken
down,
but
it
should
not
create
a
situation
where,
by
zoning
benefit
someone
for
something
that
historically
or
oftentimes
we
do
not
allow.
BG
There
has
been
significant
opposition
and
I
will
submit
of
these
for
the
record
if
I
can
before
those
like,
they
may
already
be
in
the
racket,
but
there,
and
it
goes
with
the
FA-
are
the
lot
size
the
lot
with
front
yard
setback,
radio
ad
setback
in
parking?
The
previous
speaker
said
that
there's
a
lot
of
parking
well
they've
been
cited
for
parking
in
this
particular
instance
relative
to
what
it
is
for
the
bond,
not
speaking
about
the
condominium.
BG
The
last
thing
I'd
say
that
if
it
was
desirable
in
order
to
try
and
make
this
work
well,
then
maybe
should
have
been
made
part
of
the
condominium
they
made
a
connection
to
it
and
that
may
have
satisfied
their
ability
in
order
to
do
that.
But
that
is
not
what
before
the
board
is
so,
therefore,
the
budgets
were
in
opposition.
I
have
a
state
that
opposition
for
them
strongly.
BI
C
CA
Afternoon,
I'm
Mary,
Clark
I
am
under
butter,
I
live
at
65,
Maple
Street
and
my
primary
opposition
to
the
project
is
that
this
insufficient
side,
yard
setback
and
I
think
there
are
other
topographical
problems
with
this
site.
It's
a
very
small
backyard
and
it's
it's
too
small
I
think
getting
water
and
sewer
down
there
or
doing
telephone
utility
poles
would
be
a
real
problem,
but
primarily
it's
out
of
compliance
with
setback
on
two
sides.
Thank
you
very
much
again.
C
CB
My
name
is
Debbie
jerky
a
little
bit:
87
Walnut
Street
my
rear
property
line
of
butts
a
tar
pine
I,
just
like
to
clarify
a
few
things
that
his
lawyer
presented
that
are
not
true
and
how
he
labeled
the
rear
setback.
It's
only
three
feet:
six
inches
between
the
current
rear
wall
of
that
barn
and
the
rear
property
line,
and
the
proposal
is
to
replace
a
house
in
that
exact
same
location.
So
it's
about
it.
It's
what
shorter
than
the
width
of
that
table.
CB
The
mayor's
office
says
they're
in
support
of
this,
because
the
developers
promise
to
plant
trees
and
natural
screening
I
contend
that
three
feet.
Six
inches
is
not
enough
room
to
plant
significant
screening.
Plus
allow
safe
passage
behind
a
house,
I
view
it,
even
if
he
does
do
that
that
it
can
be
very
temporary
with
landscaping.
I've
seen
this
many
other
times
before,
where
soon
as
the
property
sold.
If
the
new
owner
doesn't
like
it,
they
can
come
in
and
chop
everything
down
that
whole
hillside
is
is
bedrock.
CB
It
is
difficult
to
plant
decent
types
of
greenery
there
and
get
it
to
grow
properly.
Secondly,
they're
saying
that
it's
building
a
home
there
is
going
to
improve
the
neighborhood
and
somehow
affect
the
guy
down
the
street
that
has
junk
cars
in
his
yard.
He
also
the
lawyer
said
something
about
my
property
being
broken
up
into
two
separate
things:
the
the
auto
repair
shop
at
the
bottom
of
Walnut
Street,
that's
been
there
since
the
late
20s
and
it
was
permitted
as
an
auto
repair
and
has
been
used
as
auto
repair.
CB
CB
Boston
planning
statement
of
purpose
goals
and
objectives,
it
talks
about
providing
adequate
density
controls
and
promoting
the
character
of
residential
neighborhoods.
It
spoke
specifically
about
mountain
upon
set
and
the
older
homes
and
I
think
one
of
the
big
character
pluses
we
have
are
some
of
these
older
structures
and
barns
and
I.
Ask
if
you
allow
this
to
go
through.
Are
you
going
to
allow
every
other
owner
a
barn
or
a
detached
garage
to
turn
that
into
a
single-family
home?
CB
Y
C
Y
Good
afternoon,
chairman
and
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
James.
Cameron
I
live
at
65,
Maple,
Street
and
I
have
a
directive
butter,
and
that,
though,
the
back
of
my
lot
is
very
close
to
the
existing
building.
Whatever
the
future
building
becomes
I'll
convince
my
remarks.
I've
been
there
for
20
years.
This
that
place
in
my
art
is
literally
my
only
private
space.
We
are
not
anti
family.
We
have
12
families
living
around
our
lot.
At
this
point,
this
would
be
non
13
and
we
just
advocate
that
it
be
rebuilt
as
a
storage
building.
Y
BP
Mr.
chairman,
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
James.
Akiva
I
mean
at
12
years
a
director
butter
resident
at
87
Wall
Street
unit.
One
and
I
oppose
this
project
as
well
for
the
reasons
that
were
previously
mentioned,
as
well
as
some
concerns
I
have
about
during
the
construction
phases.
Unforeseen
circumstance
that
could
pop
up
with
the
being
so
close
to
that
steep
setback.
BW
M
J
R
The
attorney
jonquil
Jeanne
ten
Forbes
Road
in
Braintree.
Thank
you
for
taking
the
time
to
hear
this.
This
is
a
request
for
reconsideration
or
possible
new
hearing
with
respect
to
the
properties
106
106
eight
month,
Pleasant
Avenue,
and
when
a
waitron,
Pleasant
Avenue
this
project
was
these
proposals
were
heard
before
the
board
take.