►
From YouTube: Zoning Board of Appeal Hearing 11-10-20
Description
Zoning Board of Appeal Hearing 11-10-20
A
Everybody's
all
set
yes,
yes,
okay,
good
morning
the
city
of
boston,
zoning
board
of
appeal
hearing
for
on
november
10th
is
now
in
session.
This
hearing
is
being
conducted
in
accordance
with
the
applicable
provisions
of
the
open
meeting
law
and
the
executive
order
of
governor
baker.
Suspending
certain
provisions
thereof
due
to
the
ongoing
public
health
crisis.
A
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.
When
asked
to
comment,
as
with
our
in-person
meetings,
comments
and
support
will
be
followed
by
comments
in
opposition.
A
A
A
To
raise
your
hand,
click
the
participant
information
icon
from
there
find
your
name
and
on
the
lower
right
hand,
side,
you
should
see
a
hand
raising
icon
click.
The
icon
and
your
hand
will
be
raised,
virtually
click
it
again
and
your
hand
should
go
down.
If
you
are
connected
to
the
hearing
by
telephone,
please
press
star,
3..
Let
me
just
repeat
that
for
people
who
are
on
on
the
telephone,
please
press
star
3,
to
raise
your
hand,
those
are
called.
A
A
A
A
He's
not
here
yet
okay,
I'd
like
also
to
acknowledge
that
there
are
two
two
board
members
who
have
been
approved:
costa
ligres
representative
from
the
real
estate
board
costa.
Thank
you
for
being
part
of
this
meeting
and
and
observing
how
we
do
business
here.
We
look
forward
to
having
you
on
board
at
the
next
meeting.
A
E
A
B
H
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
george
morency,
I'm
an
attorney
with
business
address
of
350
west
broadway
in
south
boston.
Madam
chair
members,
this
is
a
matter
approved
in
2017
to
erect
a
new
six
story,
building
containing
nine
dwelling
units
at
29,
a
street
in
south
boston.
Madam
chair,
I
know
for
the
record
that
I
submitted
the
extension
request
letter
on
august
24th
2020,
the
decision
of
the
board
entered
on
september,
15th
2017.
H
This
is
a
second
extension
request
and
the
the
relief
is
actually
still
active
owing
to
the
governor's
order
on
cobit.
The
reason
for
the
second
request,
madam
chair
members,
is
29a
street.
My
client
has
an
ongoing
business
there.
It's
a
street
scrap
metals
and
he
has
been
trying
to
relocate
his
business
in
order
to
commence
construction.
J
B
K
B
L
B
A
B
B
H
D
B
O
B
Okay,
I'm
going
to
call
case
boa
100-6349-125,
addison
street.
This
is
to
raise
the
existing
dwelling
erecting
new
building,
consisting
of
nine
executive
suites
with
parking
for
ten
vehicles.
The
violations
article
53,
section
25,
the
use
is
conditional
and
article
2017-5.
This
is
in
the
heat,
boston,
ipod
name
and
address
before
the
record.
Please
good.
A
A
I
forget
the
date,
but
we
referred
it
to
the
to
the
law
department
to
help
us
with
this.
As
is
usually
the
case,
the
law
department
has
sent
us
information-
that's
that
is
private
and
confidential
to
this
board.
On
their
read
of
the
matter,
may
I
hear
from
anybody
on
the
board
so
that
we
can
move
the
gender
case
along.
B
This
is
to
combine
impossibles
to
create
one
lot
consisting
of
seventeen
thousand
thirty
square
feet
and
erect
a
new
four-story
residential
dwelling,
consisting
of
nine
units
with
17
parking
spaces.
The
violated
article
2017-5,
which
is
in
the
east
boston
ipod,
article
53,
section
56
upstream
parking
loading
and
requiring
insufficient
parking.
Q
Q
A
R
A
Q
Q
S
Q
Q
Q
P
Q
Street,
which
has
55
feet
of
front
reach,
there
is
access
rights
over
paris
place,
which
is
shown
to
the
top
portion
of
the
screen.
We
are
showing
a
total
of
20
parking
spaces.
17
of
those
are
located
outside
the
property.
12
of
those
will
be
associated
with
the
proposed
nine
units,
and
there
were
eight
would
be
for
visitor
parking
as
well
as
used
by
the
adjacent
restaurant.
You
know
the
next.
A
Q
Thank
you.
So,
just
briefly,
as
we
see
the
layout
and
programming
here,
I
can
give
you
just
a
brief
breakdown
of
the
unit
sizes.
Three
of
these
townhomes,
madam
chair,
will
be
three
plus
bed
three
and
a
half
baths
with
about
two
thousand
square
feet
of
living
space.
Again.
This
is
in
response
to
a
number
of
comments
that
we
heard
through
community
process
about
size
of
units
and
proposed
size
of
units
in
the
neighborhood.
Q
These
are
intended
certainly
to
accommodate
family
with
the
size
of
the
units
so
including
a
lower
level
office.
Space
based
upon
the
market
shifting
you
know
with
covid
and
having
a
lot
of
more
desire
to
see
at
home
workspace
three
of
the
other
units
are
a
little
bit
smaller
about
1600
square
feet,
but
still
three
bed,
three
bath
with.
Q
Feet
of
land
area
for
each
proposed
dwelling
unit
in
this
configuration,
even
though
we
are
proposing
to
combine
all
of
the
parcels
into
one
lot
at
17,
000
square
feet,
we
are
proposing
this
to
be
one
single
and
therefore
the
mfr
violation
would
be
triggered.
However,
we
would
have
more
than
enough
square
feet
to
meet
the
requirements
into
article
53.
Q
with
17
000
square
feet
of
land
available.
We
are
below
the
far
maximum
requirements
is
1.0.
We
are
at
0.94,
so
therefore
we
can
comply
with
the
code
based
upon
the
proposed
proposed
layer
of
this
building.
We
are,
as
I
mentioned,
providing
a
total
of
20
parking
spaces
on
site.
A
number
of
those
spaces
will
result
in
two
spaces
being
assigned
to
some
units,
but
each
space
will
have
at
least
one
parking
space.
The
code
would
require
16
parking
spaces
in
total
for
this
configuration
we
do
provide
20..
Q
However,
as
I
indicated,
because
this
is
townhouses,
the
larger
units
would
be
assigned
two
spaces
and
the
smaller
units
would
be
signed
at
least
one
parking
space
with
respect
to
the
height
of
the
building
out
of
chair.
The
bulk
of
this
building
is
at
31
feet,
which
is
below
the
height
requirement
for
the
zoning.
Q
We
do
show
a
penthouse
level
that
does
not
have
any
bedrooms
or
other
space,
but
that's
designed
or
intended
to
be
designed
to
allow
for
the
arrangement
of
private
roof
decks,
since
these
buildings
are
all
located
adjacent
to
one
another,
so
the
penthouse
level
does
exceed
the
height
limit.
But
again
the
bulk
of
this
building
is
designed
to
be
conforming
with
article
53
of
the
code.
Q
Last
but
not
least,
with
respect
to
the
open
space
we
do
provide
both
exterior
decks,
roof
decks
and
some
patios
to
the
rear
of
the
building
and
again,
this
is
a
direct
response
to
the
requests
and
comments
that
we
heard
throughout
the
community
process.
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions
from
the
board.
A
Q
So
this
is
just
showing
a
couple
of
different
design
options,
but
I
can
explain
this
briefly.
If
you
look
at
the
right
side
of
the
building,
those
are
the
three
level
larger
townhouse
units
and
the
upper
level
that
fourth
level
penthouse
is
the
access
to
the
roof
deck.
For
each
of
these,
it's
not
intended
to
be
a
head
house,
but
rather
than
making
a
full
fort
level,
we
lowered
the
roof
deck
from
above
the
fourth
level,
originally
down
to
above
the
third
level,
but
just
accessed
by
a
head
of
penthouse.
Q
I
Well,
the
the
the
choice
to
do
penthouses
as
a
way
of
sort
of
getting
around
the
the
height
issue,
I
think,
is
a
little
disingenuous.
The
mr
lin
said
that
the
bulk
of
the
the
building
is
below
the
height
levels,
but
the
truth
is,
I
mean,
you've
got
six
sizable
penthouses,
so
it
may
not
constitute
a
complete
fourth
story,
but
for
all
practical
purpose.
I
think
that
the
height
should
be
considered
at
the
top
of
the
penthouses
which
does
exceed
the
zoning
requirements.
I
The
other
point
I
would
make
on
the
parking.
If
you
look
at
the
site
plan
a10
as
mr
lin,
as
I
see
it,
it
seems
like
a
number
of
the
parking
space.
There's
there's
three
parking
spaces
under
the
building
inside
and
then
there
are
parking
spaces
directly
in
front.
You
couldn't
get
a
car
out
of
the
parking
spaces
inside
without
moving
the
other
one.
So
it's
it
is
tandem.
Q
Yes,
I
can
respond
to
that
through
the
chair.
First
of
all,
with
respect
to
the
penthouse
versus
roof
deck.
This
building
that
went
that
went
through
the
community
process
was
actually
approved
by
the
civic
association
at
four
stories,
with
a
roof
deck
above
it
we
we
modified
it
notwithstanding
that
support
for
a
larger
building
to
bring
down
the
roof
decks
to
the
third
level,
but
to
no.
I
Q
So
I
do
indicate
it's
41
feet.
We
are
requesting
relief
with
respect
to
the
parking.
Mr
early,
we
do
see
the
tandem
spaces,
but
those
multi
multi-parking
space
units
are
the
larger
2000
square
foot
unit.
So
they
do
have
two
spaces.
We
do
show
additional
parking
surface
parking.
We
just
didn't
draw
the
cars
in
them.
It
would
have
the
ability
to
have
additional
surface
parking
out
front,
and
then
we
do
see
that
one
that's
further
towards
the
middle
of
the
site
that
does
not
have
under
under
the
building
parking.
I
Yeah,
no,
no!
No,
I
I
I
mean
I
see
I
it's
you
know
look,
this
is
a
density
and
everybody
has
to
figure
out
how
to
cram
everything
in
that
they
can.
I
get
that.
I
just
would
prefer
that
it
when,
when
you
present,
you
know
don't
minute,
the
height
is
41
feet
and
that's
what
we
should
be
and
if
we're
going
to
give
relief,
that's
fine
and
the
parking
should
be
described
for
what
it
is,
which
is
tandem.
I
B
A
Q
Yes
and
madam
chair,
thank
you
that
that
issue
has
been
raised
throughout
this
community
process.
One
of
the
things
the
biggest
concern
that
we
heard
from
abutters
on
paris
street,
at
least
with
the
the
proposed
original
building,
was
shadow
impact
on
on
their
building.
So
we
we
had
some
shadow
analysis
done.
That's
one
of
the
reasons
why
we've
configured
the
building.
Accordingly,
we
do
show
setback
both
from
drake
place,
harris
street
and
as
well
as
leo
braco
terrace,
which
is
to
the
left
of
your
screen.
Q
All
of
those
areas
are
are
intended
to
be
landscape
buffer,
which
we
expect
to
be
done
through
bpd
design
review.
In
addition,
moving
the
parking
closer
to
the
middle
of
the
site,
as
opposed
to
the
site
towards
the
top
of
the
screen,
was
to
reduce
the
impact
on
the
power
street
of
butters,
and
we
can
certainly
accommodate
screening
and
buffering
along
along
the
rear
portions
of
the
power
street
property.
So,
yes,
that's
that
was
contemplated
throughout
the
process
and
we're
happy
to
incorporate
that
into
our
plan.
A
The
other
question
is:
I
noticed
that
the
project
that
is
not
part
of
this
with
the
billboard
has
is
this:
is
this
lot
dedicated
in
any
way
to
ancillary
parking
for
any
commercial
uses?
Has
it
come
in
in
any
agreements
in
the
past
to
provide
parking
for
anybody
around
any
any
others
in
proximity?
So.
Q
Madam
chair,
I
I
can
say
with
confidence
when
we
did
the
analysis
on
the
restaurant.
The
restaurant
is
a
former
site
of
of
sabloni's
bail
and
vintage,
which
was
sort
of
an
institution
in
the
east,
boston
neighborhood,
and
this
lot
was
separate
from
that
for
for
as
many
years
as
simone's
was
was
in
business.
When
some
loans
had
gone
out
of
business,
it
was
acquired.
Q
The
building
the
real
estate
was
acquired
by
one
entity
that
ended
up
using
the
parking
spaces
in
connection
with
the
restaurant,
but
there
was
never
a
formal
expansion
of
the
restaurant
that
resulted
in
parking
release.
That
would
be
necessary.
So
these
have
remained
independent,
even
though,
ultimately,
in
common
ownership
and
the
current
operator
of
the
restaurant
is
a
tenant
of
the
owner
of
the
property
and
therefore
parking
accommodations
will
be,
will
be
addressed
and
made,
and
that's
something
that
that's
already
been
worked
out
with
the
restaurant.
A
Q
Is
legal
and
benefiting
when
this
originally
was
discussed
as
a
development
site?
The
first
step
was
to
eliminate
the
building
with
the
billboard
to
open
up
more
access
onto
porter
street
through
the
due
diligence
and
analysis
for
the
site.
Claire
chan,
the
billboard
operator,
actually
maintains
an
easement
on
the
roof
and
therefore
nothing
below
the
billboard
can
be
removed.
A
Q
A
V
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
lena
tramelin,
with
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services,
we
would
like
to
go
on
the
recording
support
based
on
the
feedback
receiving
during
the
community
process.
The
applicant
modified
the
proposal
increasing
the
open
space
and
the
parking
ratio,
reducing
the
number
of
units
and
also
the
stories
and
the
density,
and
also
the
applicant
made
upcoming
commitments,
sorry
to
go
back
to
the
maverick
central
neighborhood
association
and
work
close
with
them
on
landscaping,
use
on
open
space
and
the
design.
Thank
you.
M
Ty,
thank
you.
Thank
you,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board.
My
name
is
david
sampson.
I
live
at
139
power
street.
I'm
a
director
butter
to
97
107
porter
myself,
along
with
my
neighbors,
you
have
two
letters.
I
don't
believe
you
have
two
others.
However,
we
oppose
the
project
because
most
of
all
the
variances,
including
off-street
parking
and
loading
variants,
dimensional
variants
and
the
excessive
height
variants.
M
A
M
M
M
M
M
The
current
restaurant
has
a
seating
capacity
of
50
plus
inside
and
also
another
25
plus
on
the
outside.
At
any
one
time
they
can
easily
have
up
to
60
people
in
25
to
30
cars
parking
in
this
parking
lot
about
the
proposed
parking.
The
owner
has
already
leased
back
10
of
the
pros
proposed
parking
spaces
to
the
restaurant
and
another
two
spaces
to
the
tenants
in
the
three
family
that
takes
away
twelve
spaces
mattered,
share
in
their
presentation
immediately.
M
In
addition,
the
restaurant,
as
they
do
now,
they're
using
two
spaces
for
the
dumpster
grease
trap
and
trash
barrels,
and
then
I'm
also
wondering
about
the
handicap
spaces.
If
you
take
the
minimum
of
the
two
handicap
spaces,
please
tell
me
how
many
spaces
do
we
really
have
left
for
the
new
residence
and
the
restaurant.
A
M
C
A
Please
I'm
a
ambassador:
did
you
get
her
name?
This
is,
and-
and
please
put
it
in
in
the
in
the
general
chat
that
the
person
was
speaking
in
opposition
because
of
the
unaffordability,
the
insufficient
parking
and
height,
which
are
suffocating
the
neighbors
with
yards,
let's
see
and
that
this
is
out
of
context
of
the
two
and
three
family
residential
area,
mr
lens
and
her
name
for
the
record
is
joanie
dimaso.
Thank
you,
mr
ambassador.
Q
Let
me
speak
clearly
for
the
record
manager.
The
the
arrangement
with
the
restaurant
was,
with
the
full
understanding
that
there
have
been
development
plans
for
this
site
prior
to
even
when
the
restaurant
took
over
its
current
operation.
So
the
restaurant
is
very
clear
that
there
is
a
development
plan.
They
have
been
present
at
community
meetings
when
we
proposed
it
and
that
if
there
is
additional
parking
available,
then
that
arrangement
can
be
worked
out
with
them.
However,
there
is
at
least
one
parking
space
available
for
each
proposed
unit.
It's
one
of
the
reasons.
Q
We've
reduced
the
project
from
20
units
down
to
the
current
nine
and
again,
because
we
did
hear
concerns
over
parking.
We
wanted
to
ensure
that
this
would
not
be
something
that
would
be
of
concern
to
the
surrounding
neighborhood.
If
there
are
arrangements,
including
the
three
family
dwelling,
those
again
are
arrangements
that
are
accommodations,
not
requirements
under
our
under
any
permits
that
are
issued
for
either
of
those
properties.
So
I
just
want
to
be
very
clear
with
the
board
on
that.
Q
If
the
restaurant
has
an
arrangement,
it
is
certainly
subject
to
the
developers
right
to
build
on
the
site,
and
that
was
something
that
was
made
very
clear
and
I
don't
have
their
lease
in
front
of
me.
But
I
can
assure
the
board
that
that
is
something
that
is
quite
clear.
With
the
with
the
current
operator
of
the
restaurant.
A
I
Right
well,
these
aren't
exactly
head
houses,
and
this
I
mean
we
have.
This
exceeds
the
height,
let
me
say,
but
there
there
is
living
space,
you
know,
so
they
so
in
a
way.
It's
a
way
of
getting
around
the
you
know
putting
a
full
fourth,
fourth
story,
but
if,
if
it
was
reduced
to
the
to
below
it's
actually
below
the
the
height,
so
at
least
this
board
member,
I'm
okay
with
the
but
the
penthouses
as
as
they
exist,.
B
Following
the
next
case,
calling
voa
103
8179
142
chelsea
street,
this
is
to
confirm
the
opportunity
as
a
three
family
and
change
to
a
poor
family
also
to
renovate
the
structure,
a
fourth
story,
edition
rare
edition
and
rare
decks
and
egress
stairs
the
violations.
Article
27g.
This
is
isn't.
He
fought
an
ipod
article,
53
section
56,
our
street
parking
loaning
article
53,
section
8
of
four
family
uses
for
bid.
Article
53,
section,
52
group
structure,
restriction,
also
53,
section
9.
The
additional
library
is
insufficient.
B
Article
53
section
9,
the
fourier
ratio
is
accepted.
Article
53,
section
9.
The
building
has
assessment
stories,
article
53
section
9
the
building
had
the
excessive
defeat
I
unusable.
Space
is
insufficient.
Article
53
section
I
in
the
front
yard
is
insufficient.
Article
53
section
9
on
the
side
yard
is
sufficient
and
article
53,
section
9.
The
rail
yard
is
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Y
Thank
you,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board
attorney
jeff
drago,
with
an
address
of
11
beacon
street
from
drago
and
toscano,
representing
the
petitioner
odessa
capital,
and
I
also
have
the
architect
adam
glassman.
With
me
I
have
mentioned
this
proposal
is
to
change
the
occupancy
from
an
existing
three-family
residential
dwelling
to
a
four-family
residential
dwelling.
It
would
add
a
top
floor
unit.
That's
recessed!
I
just
want
to
make
a
clarification
in
the
comment.
Y
Y
Y
A
Y
A
I
I
I
Well,
it's
not
it's
not
the
end
of
the
day.
It's
the
drawings,
I
mean
it
says
to
the
top
of
the
roof.
What
I'm
trying
to
ascertain
is
what
the
florida
ceiling
height
is
on
that
fourth
floor,
because
it
doesn't
look
adequate
and
obviously
we're
not
going
to
prove
anything
without
building
that
the
grand
building
code
relief.
So
do
you
have
something
that
shows
that
dimension.
O
V
W
A
Y
B
You
very
much
following
the
next
case
calling
voa
110-4690-185
london
street.
This
is
to
extend
and
repair
the
foundation
within
the
setback
at
a
penthouse
floor
and
increase
far
renovate
interior.
The
violations
article
2017.
This
is
in
the
east,
boston,
ipod,
tripod,
article
53,
section
9,
excessive
ssar,
article
53,
section
9,
excessive
height
article
53,
section,
9,
insufficient
side,
job
setback,
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
A
AA
A
AA
AA
If
we
go
to
the
to
the
upper
slides
showing
some
of
the
pictures,
the
pictures
reflect
that
the
penthouse
will
be
sent
back
and
it's
similar
to
the
butter.
If
we
go
up
a
little
bit
more,
please
there's
a
picture.
That's
a
slide
that
shows
the
current
existing
condition
that
that
will
suffice.
It
and
then
you'll
see.
There's
two.
The
the
butter
has
a
similar
setback
and
we
will
have
that
that
will
be
combined
with
the
third
floor.
So
the
third
floor,
fourth
will
be
owner
occupant.
AA
AA
AA
AA
I
I
What
the
relation
is
to
the
grade,
because
they're
on
a
and
they're
rendering
it
looks
like
there's
a
window,
there
does
not
have
the
adequate
floor
to
cell
height.
I
don't
know
if
it
slopes
back.
I
can't
tell
because
there's
no
elevation,
drawings
and
the
second
thing
is
that
can
collect.
Can
you
bring
up
the
this
slide
with
the
flood
zone?
I
Analysis
yeah?
It
looks
like
if,
if
that
red,
if
that
red
dot
is
the
location
of
the
house,
it
is
in
the
flood
zone.
So
I
don't
know,
I
don't
understand
how
someone
can
conclude
that
it's
not
when
it's
pretty
at
least
based
on
that
map,
that's
supplied
by
the
applicant.
It
pretty
clearly
is,
and
if
that's
the
case,
I
don't
think
there
should
be
any
living
space
in
the
basement,
and
I
believe
that
the
bpda
agrees
with
that.
We
could
ask
mr
hampton
for
his
views.
A
A
V
Morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
lena
trameli,
with
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services,
we
would
like
to
go
on
the
recording
support
during
the
community
process.
The
applicant
addressed
most
of
the
concerns
of
the
abandoned
and
this
proposal
received
support
from
maverick
central
neighborhood
association.
Thank
you.
W
B
B
A
F
No,
I
mean
it's
very
specific,
we're
concerned,
as
you
are
madam
chair
about
any
basement
living
space
where
it
is
going
to
be
above
or
below
the
base
flood
elevation.
I
do
not
know
if
this
is
technically
in
a
fema
flood
zone.
I
don't
think
it
is,
but
it
is
absolutely
in
the
base
flood
elevation
for
climate
resiliency.
A
B
This
is
a
rare
addition
to
an
existing
three
family
violations:
article
27,
I'm
sorry
with
new
side
and
roof
decks.
The
violations
article
2017.
This
is
in
the
east,
boston,
ipod,
article
53,
section
9
excessive
far
and
article
53
insufficient
usable,
open
space
name
and
address
for
the
record
plane.
AB
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
this
is
tim
johnson,
architect,
599,
east
broadway,
boston
and
I'm
joined
by
the
project
attorney
jim
canavan.
If
she
had
an
ambassador
could
unmute
him.
Thank
you,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board.
Our
client
is
proposing
a
I
first
like
to
say
this
project
is
located
in
the
three
family,
2000
sub
district
east
boston.
Our
client
is
proposing
a
13
page
two.
Thank
you.
AB
AB
AB
A
It's
so
it's
228
square
feet
per
dwelling
unit.
So
what
I'd
like
to
understand
is
it
looks
like
there's
a
difference,
because
it
is
a
narrow
passageway
in
what
was
approved
from
this
board.
For
that
parking
and
the
way
it's
set
up
now
it
looked
like
it
was
approved
as
angled
parking
to
allow
for
ease
of
access,
and
now
it
looks
like
it's.
It's
not
angled
parking
anymore
to
accommodate.
I
suspect
the
additional
228
square
feet,
plus
the
patio
that
is
proposed
for
unit
one.
AB
AB
I
Well
same
for
the
same
problem
that
we
keep
encountering,
which
is
that
there's
an
intention
to
put
living
space
in
the
basement
and
most
of
the
basement
is
below
grade,
and
so
they
try
to
solve
it
with
window
wells
for
the
egress
doors
and
window
wells
for
the
windows.
But
this
is
I
you
know
I
don't.
This
is
not
satisfactory.
A
V
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board
lina
tremeling
with
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services,
we
would
like
to
go
on
the
recordings
for
this
proposal.
The
office
of
neighborhood
services
held
on
a
various
meetings
on
november
14
2019,
where
the
applicant
addressed
most
of
the
country
expressed
by
the
abandons
during
the
community
process.
We
heard
some
concerns
regarding
property
line,
ownership
and
use
of
rare
yard
for
parking
that
was
previously
approved
by
the
city
and
consider
these
are
not
related
to
sony
concerns.
Thank
you.
W
AC
Oh
sorry
about
that
good
good
morning,
my
name
is
william
heaney,
I'm
an
attorney
in
beverly
massachusetts.
My
address
is
86
dodge
street,
I'm
representing
the
director
butters
darlene
jardina
and
marie
pepe
long.
Their
families
have
owned
the
neighboring
property
for
at
least
three
generations.
In
fact,.
AC
AC
Opposition
is
based
on
I'm
not
going
to
repeat
the
number
of
neighborly
concerns.
You've
already
pointed
out
the
parking.
There
are
some
sight
line,
impingements
that
come
with
this
new
addition,
but
I'm
here
more
as
a
land
corps
practitioner
and
my
objection
is
more
based
on
your
section
7.3
of
your
boston
code,
which
requires
certain
requirements
to
be
met
in
order
to
issue
a
variance.
Okay,.
A
They
were
in
support,
okay
and
the
city
council
left
it
to
the
discretion
of
the
board
yeah.
Okay,
so
it
sounds
like
there's
also
five
letters
in
opposition
that
we've
been
hearing
from,
and
I
know
that
you
have
concerns
about
the
basement
living
space
and
I
think
we
all
have
concerns
about
basement
living
exception
into
the
basement.
AB
A
I
I
B
A
B
Very
good,
very
good,
madam
chair,
for
the
record,
calling
doa
one
one,
one:
zero,
four:
zero:
three
one
to
four
mechanic
court:
this
is
a
change
of
option
from
six
to
five
inch.
Restaurant,
executive,
suites
and
restaurant
no
work
to
be
done.
The
violation
article
54
section,
12,
executive
usage,
executive
suites,
is
conditional
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
AD
A
You're
fine,
then,
if
we
read
all
four
of
them
into
the
record,
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
the
record
is
is
clear:
okay,
so
mr
ferrillo,
as
attorney
for
for
mr
dis,
the
pasquale
you're.
Okay,
if
we
read
them
all
into
the
record
together,
yes,
okay,
so
let's
go
for
it,
because
that
means
that
all
votes,
the
votes
will
cover
all
of
them
and
just
a
reminder
that
this
is
a
six-member
board.
You
need
five
members
in
in
support
for
this
to
carry
okay.
AD
A
AD
A
AD
AD
The
reason
this
is
before
you
is
that
the
contractor
who
filed
this
at
the
time
the
executive
suites
were
in
allowed
use.
He
didn't
draw
the
distinction
between
apartments
and
effective
suites.
It
never
got
noticed,
although
the
plans,
trans
examiner,
the
isd,
building,
examiner,
etc
all
familiar
with
the
fact
that
they
were,
in
fact
being
renovated
as
executive
suites.
AD
AD
B
Madam
chair
secretary
here
I
I
did
not
call
these
other
the
purpose
and
the
violations
into
the
record.
Would
you
like
me
to
do
that
because
the
objectives-
please
please
just
like
myself
here,
so
I
already
did
the
first
one
for
mechanics
and
go
to
hanover
and
then
board
alley.
So
this
was
for
239
243
hanover.
There
was
a
change
of
arcs
from
a
restaurant
and
seven
apartments
to
a
restaurant
with
seven
executive
suites,
the
existing
conditions
no
work
to
be
done.
B
The
violation
was
article
54,
section,
12
executive
suite
is
a
conditional
use
in
the
hanover
cc
sub
district.
This
is
for
eleven
board.
This
is
a
change
of
auction
from
three
apartments,
one
retail
store
to
three
executive
suites,
one
retail
store
no
work
to
be
done.
Article
54,
section,
12,
executive
suites
are
conditional
and
for
two
board
this
is
a
change
from
existing
condition
of
eight
apartments
and
commercial
space
to
a
basement,
bakery
to
executive
tweets
and
bakery
no
work
to
be
done.
The
violation
is
article
54,
section,
12,
executive,
suite's
condition.
G
AF
AG
AH
AI
AJ
Hello,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
lydia
lowe,
I'm
the
executive
director
of
the
chinatown
community,
land
trust,
and
while
this
proposal
is
not
in
our
neighborhood,
we
are
a
neighborhood
that
has
been
devastated
by
the
short-term
rental
industry
and
therefore
we're
very
concerned
about
the
trend
of
proposals
to
convert
residential
properties
to
executive
suite
use,
because
when
we
are
in
the
midst
of
one
of
the
worst
housing
crisis
in
history,
on
top
of
that,
the
pandemic,
which
has
made
the
situation
even
more
serious.
With
this
particular
proposal,
our
concern
hold.
A
AK
A
J
Thank
you,
madam
chairwoman.
This
is
city.
Council
live
michael
flaherty
here
to
speak
in
support
of
the
proponent.
The
proponent,
as
you
know,
is
seeking
relief
from
the
board
for
a
conditional
use
permit
to
continue
operating
executive
suites
and
bring
them
into
compliance
with
zoning
code.
No
work
is
being
done
as
referenced
by
member
mark
erlich
at
any
of
these
locations.
J
They've
been
in
operation
now,
for
several
years
the
operator
has
been
responsible
to
the
community
he's
been
a
good
neighbor
oftentimes
providing
residents
who
have
experienced
hardships,
those
that
have
been
burnt
out
due
to
fires
or
residents
that
have
had
loved
ones
pass
away
into
or
had
visiting.
Relatives
coming
from
out
of
country
stay
at
these
executive
suites
free
of
charge.
J
The
proponents
connection
with
the
neighborhood
was
highlighted
very
well
attended
a
buddhist
meeting
held
by
office
of
neighborhood
services
and
has,
I
believe,
over
50
50
over
50
people
and
offering
letters
of
support
at
that
meeting.
I
also
want
to
note
that,
as
the
former
chair
of
government
operations,
when
we
passed
the
the
airbnb
ordinance,
I
can
speak
firsthand
to
the
goals
of
our
short-term
rental
ordinance.
AG
J
AL
Yes,
madam
chair,
thank
you,
members
of
the
board,
patrick
lyons,
on
behalf
of
state
representative,
aaron
mikerowicz.
We
wanted
to
go
on
the
record
of
support
for
the
proponent.
This
proponent
has
been
in
business
since
2013.
You
know
pre-short-term
rental
surge,
which,
spurred
you
know,
action
at
the
state
legislature
and
the
city
to
regulate
the
industry,
and
you
know
they've
been
exemplary
business
owners
for
you
know
the
past
seven
years
and
you
know
they're
extremely
local.
AL
AM
Go
ahead,
yeah.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
Madame
chance
is
joe
mcgowan
with
city
council,
frank
bacon's
office.
Although
this
isn't
a
council
his
district,
he
feels
strongly
and
wanted
to
echo
the
sentiments
of
the
previous
counselor
and
we
like
to
go
on
reckon
in
support
of
this
lifetime.
Good
neighbor
of
boston.
A
Thank
you.
Thank
you
counselor.
I
am
so
we
we
have
heard
people
and
support
people
in
opposition
mayor
and
and
we
we
do
recognize
that
this
this
was
done
without
without
adequate
permits
at
the
time,
but
we
also
do
have
some
information
from
the
the
city
of
boston's
legal
council.
So
may
I
have
a
motion
please.
Madam.
I
Yeah,
I
appreciate
you
know
the
fact
that
this
has
been
in
existence
and
that
there's
a
lot
of
support
from
community
political
leaders.
But
I
don't
see
how
we
can
be
consistent
as
a
board
in
terms
of
our
policy,
unless
we,
unless
we
deny
applications
for
executive
suites
as
being
in
violation
of
the
short-term
mental
ordinance.
So
I'm
going
to
make
a
motion
to
deny.
B
Going
to
the
next
case,
called
308
109
2076
847
to
847
c
east
5th
street
this
to
combine
console
429
of
3150
with
parcel
430
3125
square
feet
to
a
new
lot
to
have
six
thousand
two
hundred
fifty
square
feet.
Demolish
the
existing
two
family
erect
four
town
houses
with
seven
parking
spaces;
the
violations,
article
29
second
floor.
This
is
in
the
green
belt
protection
overlay
district,
article
68,
section
29,
the
roof
structure,
restrictions,
article
68,
section,
8.3,
dimensional,
regulations
of
the
main
entrance
name
and
address
to
the
record
plate.
H
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
george
marantz,
I'm
an
attorney
with
the
business
address
at
350,
west
broadway
in
south
boston.
Joining
me
today
on
the
teleconference
are
my
clients,
owners
of
the
property,
james
and
danielle
mcclure,
and
the
project
architect
will
challafont
from
colisa
design.
H
Madam
chair
members,
this
is
an
application
to
demolish
an
existing
two-family
dwelling
on
this
lot,
which
has
combined,
would
comprise
6250
square
feet.
The
zoning
district
is
mfr
multi-family
residential
within
south
boston's
article
68
zoning,
madam
chair,
in
terms
of
a
brief
descript
description
of
the
project
of
the
proposed
building.
Again,
this
would
be
a
four
unit
building
unit.
One
would
be
eighteen
hundred
fifty
four
square
feet
that
would
be
a
three
bedroom
unit.
Two
would
be
1786
square
feet.
H
A
H
Certainly
so
the
other
two
cider
violations
are
building
height
under
article
68
and
and
also
location
of
main
entrances,
so
the
existing
building
in
in
terms
of
building
heights,
the
the
slide
that
I
think
best
would
depict
this
for
the
board
would
be
sheet
a-303
if
we
scroll
down,
which
is
towards
the
end,
and
it
will
show
the
existing
building,
which
has
a
gable
roof.
This
is
the
pitch
roof
facing
the
street.
H
This
section
of
article
68
was
the
result
of
the
expiration
of
the
ipod
in
the
amendment
of
article
68
and
the
new
provision.
All
of
that
slide.
There
is
perfect
if
we
can
go
to
that's,
that's
it
exactly.
The
the
amendment
to
article
68
provides
that,
although
the
maximum
building
height
in
article
68
in
an
mfr
district
is
40
feet
for
any
building
existing.
H
As
of
the
date
of
the
amendment
of
article
68,
which
was
october
15
2019
in
the
case
of
a
total
of
partial
demolition,
that
existing
building
height
becomes
the
maximum
building
height
for
the
lot
as
the
board
can
see.
From
this
view,
the
new
the
existing
buildings
two
and
a
half
story
structure
with
the
page
groove
the
new
building-
would
be
a
three-story
structure
with
the
mansard
roof.
H
The
new
building
would
be
approximately
32
feet
in
height.
It
would
actually
be
a
couple
of
inches
lower
than
the
top
of
the
peak
of
the
existing
building.
However,
a
building
with
the
gable
roof
is
measured
in
terms
of
building
height
to
the
median
of
the
gable,
so
as
board
members
can
see
on
that
slide
where
the
arrow
is
pointing
down
on
the
existing
building
height,
essentially
the
midpoint
of
the
gabled
roof,
that
is,
the
building
height
maximum
for
zoning.
The
new
building
is
above.
H
The
other
violation
is
the
location
of
the
entrance
doors.
These
are
four
townhouse
style
units
unit.
One
would
have
a
front
or
entrance
a
main
entrance
to
the
unit
facing
east
fifth
street.
The
code,
provided
each
dwelling
unit
must
have
an
entry
door
facing
the
front
of
the
street.
That
is
the
only
other
violation
of
the
four
units.
Two
of
the
main
entries
face:
east
fifth
street
and
two
of
them
face
the
left
side
lot
line.
Those
are
the
violations
everything
else.
I
H
I
Okay
and
the
second
thing-
and
this
is
a
minor
thing
on
the
site
plan-
the
proposed
curb
cut-
the
driveway
is
fine.
The
proposed
curb
cut
is
14
feet
which,
in
an
urban
area,
where
there's
very
little
street
parking,
it's
I'm
curious
as
to
why
not
just
use
the
conventional
10
or
12
foot
driveway
and
create
some
more
yeah
parking.
H
I
H
H
AN
Manager,
members
of
the
board,
haley
dillon,
mayor's
office,
neighborhood
services,
I'd
like
to
go
record
an
opposition
due
to
the
amount
of
opposition.
We
have
17
letters
of
opposition.
I
know
that
the
board
doesn't
have
all
of
them
because
some
of
them
were
sent
this
morning
and
five
letters
of
support
that
we
hadn't
wanted
to
be
meeting
in
august
and
the
second
inviters
meeting
in
september
and
the
clients
also
or
the
proposal.
AN
AN
AO
One
of
the
chair
members
of
the
guaran's
office,
the
counselor,
would
like
to
go
on
recurring
opposition
due
to
feedback
from
the
abutters
neighbors
and
the
city
point
neighborhood
association.
They
have
all
expressed
concerns
that
the
boston
led
landmarks
commission
indicated
last
week
that
the
article
85
process
has
no
income.
AO
Moreover,
they
have
highlighted
concerns
about
the
high
of
the
development,
which
will
reportedly
restrict
light
the
side,
decks
and
privacy
with
how
far
back
the
proposed
development
will
go
and
the
gpa
violation
ensure
neighbors
relate.
They
have
not
addressed
feedback
from
the
meetings
regarding
scaling
back
the
proposal,
reducing
roof,
hatches,
moving
the
building
forward
and
removing
the
side
decks.
Thank
you.
AH
AP
AQ
AR
A
Modica,
thank
you
very
much.
We
we
still
need
to
hear.
We
still
need
to
process
this.
So
thank
you.
So
I
just
so
I'm
just
going
to
close
comments
right
there
we've
heard
people
speak
and
support
and
opposition
right.
I
just
wanted
to
remind
the
board
members
that
the
use
and
the
parking
and
other
items
are
not
on
the
table.
What
is
before
us
is
the
location
of
the
main
entrance
and
the
roof
structure
restrictions.
A
H
Certainly
just
three
quick
points,
madam
chair,
my
clients
are
engaged
in
article
85
they're
within
the
demolition
delay
period
and
providing
alternatives
to
demolition
to
the
landmarks
commission
number
two:
the
two
zoning
issues
which
I
did
hear
objections
to
the
project
based
on
I
heard
height
in
density.
This
building
is
32
feet
high,
with
the
exception
of
the
lenin
court
condominiums
at
the
corner
of
farragut
road.
There
are
only
two
buildings
on
this
entire
block:
either
side
of
the
street
that
are
not
taller
than
this
proposed
building,
855
and
838
east
5th
street.
H
At
32
feet.
It
is
under
the
otherwise
prevailing
40
feet
maximum
height
in
south
austin
in
terms
of
density.
The
far
here
is
1.33.
As
the
board
knows,
the
maximum
density
under
article
68
is
2.0
man.
I'm
sure
I
would
just
ask,
if
beg
the
board's
indulgence,
just
to
hear
one
brief
commentary
bottle
from
one
of
my
clients,
danielle
mcclure,.
F
Yes,
I'm
sorry
about
that.
Madam
chair
jeff,
hampton
boston
planning
development
agency,
I
believe,
on
this
particular
case.
We
recommended
approval,
with
proviso
that
the
curb
cut
not
be
widened.
As
mr
erlickett
brought
up
on
the
plot
plan,
we
saw
the
same
thing
in
that
we
do
extensive
design
review
making.
You
know,
echoing
the
counselors
points
to
the
design
of
the
building.
Really
we
took
essentially
that
provision
in
the
north
end
is.
F
The
board
is
well
aware
that
if
you
knock
down
any
projects,
the
the
allowable
building
heights,
subsequently
to
any
partial
or
total
demolition
is
what
was
there.
So
that
is
now
in
effect,
this
is
actually
the
first
case.
I
think
that
has
come
before
the
board,
where
you
have
a
building
that
is
lower
than
the
as
of
right
height
because
of
demolition,
and
the
issue
with
the
front
doors
nods
facing
the
street
is
something
that
has
been
in
the
the
neighborhood
zoning
articles.
AS
AT
All
right,
my
name
is
doug
stefanov
architect
for
the
proposal
address
of
423
west
broadway.
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
I
come
before
you
to
seek
relief
to
build
four
private
roof
decks
for
the
four
condominium
owners
of
the
top
floor
of
67
l
street
57l
is
a
13
unit,
new
constructed
building
and.
A
AT
A
A
AT
I
A
AN
Hi
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
haley
dillon,
mayor's
office
and
neighborhood
services
would
like
to
go
on
record
and
support.
I
had
the
same
exact
questions
because
we
had
two
of
our
meetings:
the
first
about
meaning
the
abutters
opposed
because
they
said
no
roof.
Decks
were
part
of
the
process,
but
I
searched
everywhere.
I
searched
the
zba,
the
civic
associations,
my
predecessors
files.
There
was
nothing
that
said
that
they
were
going
to
put
roof
deck,
so
we'd
like
to
recommend
support,
because
there's
no
evidence
of
that.
Thank
you.
AO
Thank
you
adam.
Yes,
one
of
the
chair
members
of
the
board
would
like
to
go
on
recurring
support
due
to
positive
community
process
and
support
letters
we
have
received
from
our
daughters
and
neighbors
who
have
relate
that
the
decks
are
in
line
with
surrounding
properties
develop.
The
the
development
team
has
also
worked
with
the
neighbors
and
relay
that
the
decks
are
exclusive
to
the
units
and
will
not
be
used
for
short-term
rentals.
Thank
you.
C
A
AN
B
Very
good
calling
the
next
case
calling
boa
105
3178
289
dorchester
street.
This
is
to
raise
the
existing
single-story
building
to
construct
a
new
four-story
four-unit
residential
building
violation,
article
13
section
13-1
excessive
ar
article
13
section
13-1.
The
number
of
allowed
stories
has
been
exceeded.
Article
13,
section
13-1,
the
maximum
allowed
height
has
been
exceeded.
A
S
The
proposal
before
you
today
is
for
289
dorchester
street
in
south
boston.
It's
the
existing
telegraph
hill
bar
and
restaurant.
The
bar
has
been
closed.
The
proposal
is
to
construct
a
four-story
four-unit
residential
building.
The
the
slot
is
article
68.
This
is
falls
into
the
light
industrial
manufacturing.
That's
why
the
zoning
variances
requests
seem
to
be
so
high.
S
The
density
and
passing
of
the
build
is
very
consistent,
the
other
buildings
and
residential
buildings
in
the
area,
but
we
are
seeking
to
construct
a
four-story
residential
building
with
mechanical
and
storage
at
grade.
So
you
enter
the
first
floor
unit
would
be
a
two-bed
603
square
foot
residential
unit
and
then
in
the
basement
plan
would
be
all
storage
mechanical,
no
habitable
space
in
the
basement.
S
S
Each
unit
is
units
two
and
three
are
631
square
foot,
two
bed,
one
bath
residential
units
and
then
unit
four
picks
up
a
little
bit
of
additional
square
feet
at
square
footage.
At
813
square
feet
with
again
the
rear
deck,
there
is
no
proposal
for
a
roof,
deck
or
hatch
or
head
house
the
we
held
in
a
butters
meeting
and
met
with
the
aca
the
project
was,
there
was
some
support
and
some
opposition.
A
S
So
primarily,
this
area,
madam
chair,
is
all
residential
directly
across
old
colony.
Ave
is
scheduled
for
a
very
large
scale,
washington,
village
development,
which
will
be
at
six
stories
directly
behind
us
on
mitchell
street
at
twenty
four
twenty
eight
years
official
street.
Those
are
all
existing
four-story
buildings
and
then
the
newly
constructed
building
at
on
on
old
colony,
directly
behind
mitchell
street
is
a
five-story
residential
building
multi-unit,
as
well
as
the
affordable
housing
across
the
street.
S
The
redevelopment
of
that
will
be
at
four
story,
so
we
feel
that
the
height
and
density
in
the
massing
is
very
consistent
with
what's
going
on
in
the
neighborhood.
It
actually
goes
in
the
missing
tooth
from
an
urban
design
standpoint.
It's
a
one-story
building
in
the
middle
of
multi-story
buildings,.
AN
Chair
members
of
the
board,
haley
dillon
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services,
elected
american
opposition.
There
was
a
similar
project
at
the
board.
I
think
three
weeks
ago,
where
the
andrews
square,
civic
association
asked
them
to
come
down
the
floor
and
they
did
and
they
had
nothing
but
support.
They
asked
these
guys
to
come
down
the
floor
and
they
didn't
so
everybody's
still
in
that
position.
Thank
you.
AH
AO
They
expressed
concern
regarding
negative
impacts
due
to
the
lack
of
any
parking
and
that
a
four-story
for
unit
project
does
nothing
with
the
character
of
that
community.
The
cv
groups
relayed
a
desire
for
the
proponent
to
work
with
the
community
on
coming
to
a
fair
and
reasonable
compromise
on
the
number
of
stores
and
units
for
the
project.
Thank
you.
B
F
Yes,
madam
chairman
members
of
poor
jeff,
hampton
at
the
bpda,
all
the
elected
officials
stated
exactly
what
we
have
in
our
recommendation
to
denial
without
prejudice.
If
you
were
to
look
at
the
you
know,
telegraph
hillbar
dead
on
it's
three
stories
on
either
side,
so
we'd
ask
them
to
take
off
the
fourth
story
too,
but
our
vote
right
now
is
denial
without
prejudice.
S
We
certainly
understand
the
desire
for
reduction
in
the
height,
but
if
you
look
at
the
context
of
the
pending
development,
the
developments
directly
behind
it
and
the
directly
across
the
street
appropriate
it
it
bridges.
The
gap
between
the
six
stories
of
a
very
large
scale,
development
below
and
and
the
building
directly
behind.
It
is
at
old
colony,
which
is
a
new
development,
is
five
stories
and
the
three
direct
buildings
behind
it
at
24,
28
and
34
mitchell
street
four
stories.
D
B
Calling
your
next
case
calling
voa
953
865
561
dudley
street.
This
is
a
change
of
offers
to
include
a
cannabis
dispensary.
The
violations,
article
50
section
28
cannabis
establishment-
has
been
used
in
an
mfr
ls
sub
district
article
50
section
29
a
lot
of
areas
insufficient
article
50,
section
29.
The
lot
frontage
is
insufficient
article
50
section
29,
the
fluidity
ratio
is
excessive.
B
AU
A
Counselor
council,
before
you
go
ahead,
just
a
reminder
that
this
is
a
six
member
board.
You
need
five
members
and
support
for
this
project
to
carry
additionally,
if
you
do
decide
to
go
ahead,
I'd
like
to
tell
everybody
who's
on
the
line
that
we'd
like
to
hear
in
testimony
in
the
following
order:
mayor's
office,
elected
officials
or
representative
of
elected
officials
and
then
we'd
like
to
hear
from
three
or
four
of
butters.
A
AU
The
reason
why
the
additional
dimensional
variances
in
one
conditional
were
being
referenced
has
really
has
to
do
with
the
subdivision
of
the
of
the
property.
The
property
was
deliberately
subdivided
for
two
main
reasons:
one
it
will
achieve
at
the
distance
of
half
a
mile
from
the
nearest
existing
marijuana
establishment.
You
actually
can
see
it
on
that
site
plan
right
there.
AU
AU
Yeah,
so
so
what
we
did
here,
that
was
one
of
the
reasons
why
we
subdivided,
and
the
other
reason
is
that
the
uncle
who
ran
this
bodega
for
many
many
years
is
now
retiring
and,
and
he
is
going
to
rent
out
the
parking
spaces
to
the
operator.
It's
a
way
that
he
can
continue
to
earn
some
form
of
income.
That's
not
touching
any
of
the
cannabis
uses
he's
going
to
retire
in
the
dominican
republic
and
the
whole
issue
around
cannabis
is
treated
differently
throughout
the
world.
AU
D
A
Counselor
I'd
like
to
just
say
to
you
right
up
front
that
you
know
the
relief
goes
with
the
property
and
not
with
the
owner.
So
if
you
could
explain
all
the
issues
and
how
parking
would
work
you
know
without
you
know,
just
you
know
on
the
chance
that
the
lot
be
as
as
laid
out
here
gets
sold
or
something
else
happens.
AU
If
I
could,
the
so
as
a
result
of
the
subdivision,
it
throws
the
project
into
a
couple
dim
a
few
dimensional
variances
one
has
to
do
with
the
lot
being
an
insufficient
size,
so
now
that
the
new
lot
that
rear
lot,
that
the
building
is
on
is
now
3725
square
feet
in
an
area
where
4
000
is,
is
the
lot
size?
The
frontage,
of
course,
is
no
longer
so
you
get
you
get
the
frontage
matter,
because
it's
technically
behind
that
front
parcel.
AU
AU
In
this
case,
you
wouldn't
need
to
record
an
easement,
because
the
lease
would
would
allow
for
that.
You
know
and
then,
of
course,
you
have
side
yard
insufficient
side.
Insufficient
was
already
was
already
triggered
by
the
second
the
structure.
On
the
second
floor
of
this
building,
there
was
an
addition.
A
AU
Sure
so
the
next
slide
will
show
you
the
floor
plan.
We
did
supplement
the
record
with
old
plants,
but
that
will
do
that
will
absolutely
do.
The
the
hours
of
operations
are
between
9
a.m,
to
8
p.m,
monday
through
sunday,
and
that's
been
codified
in
the
host
community
agreement
between
the
city
and
the
applicant.
Your
the
these
things
changed
a
little
bit
and
we
did
get
them
to
do,
but
it's
not
substantive
for
the
purpose
of
me
to
walk
you
through
this.
Essentially,
the
main
change
had
to
do
with
the
handicap.
AU
AU
This
is
great,
yes,
please.
So
this
is
the
existing
condition.
You
can
see
how
there's
this
ramp,
that
kind
of
goes
up
through
the
front
of
the
building.
If
you
go
down
to
the
next
slide,
you'll
see
yeah,
that's
just
a
that's
just
the
elevation.
If
you
go,
one
more
you'll
see
the
floor
plan
that
the
chair
one
there
there
you
go
so
now
you
see
that
we're
raising
that
long
access
ramp
on
the
left
side
of
the
lot.
AU
On
the
front
of
the
at
the
front
of
the
building,
you
will
access
the
you'll
access,
the
dispensary
at
the
in
one
door
and
you'll
leave
the
dispensary
in
another
door,
so
you'll
walk
in
through
the
front
closest
to
those
stairs.
That's
how
you
get
into
the
building.
There's
a
security
check-in
area
once
you're
allowed
through
this.
Through
this.
This
is
adult
use.
This
is
21
and
older.
There
is
no
medical
here
which
would
allow
for
like
18
and
older.
AU
If
you
have
an
id,
this
is
just
adult
use,
so
you're
only
getting
in
if
you're
21
and
if
you
have
a
valid
id
you
walk
in
through
this
once
you're
verified
and
through
that
front
door
system.
We
then
brought
into
the
showroom
area
you're
looking
at
about
a
total
square
footage
of
around
2600
square
feet
of
this
area,
and
you
walk
in
and
walk
out
after
you've
purchased
through
the
other
door.
That's
off
to
the
right
there.
A
A
AU
AU
Originally
we
thought
we
could
get
in
12,
but
after
we
played
within
eight
eight
spaces,
which
is
more
than
a
lot
of
the
dispensaries
you're
going
to
be
seeing
a
lot
of
them
do
not
have
access
to
parking
and
there's
this
canopy
and
overhang,
and
this
area
of
this
raised
accents
to
allow
for
the
handicap
ramp.
All
of
that
would
allow
for
spillover.
If,
if
and
when
it
it
was,
it
was
needed.
We
don't
anticipate
on
that.
AU
We
do
feel
that
the
the
2600
square
feet
of
the
sh
of
the
floor
will
accommodate
the
demand
that
we
anticipate.
Most
of
these
dispensaries
throughout
massachusetts
aren't
seeing
anything
near
over
300
300
throughout
the
course
of
the
entire
day,
they're
all
starting
to
normalize
in
their
throughput
of
of
people.
A
A
AU
I
I
don't
I
you
would
be
you'd
be
hard-pressed
to
find
your
board.
I
don't
I
don't
think
would
allow
us
to
try
to
build
anything
on
that
front
yard.
I
mean
we're
throwing
off
some
variances
here,
but
but
none
of
them
are
actual
the
result
of
a
building
they're
only
created
as
a
result
of
the
subdivision
of
the
of
the
property.
A
No,
I
get
it,
I
get
it,
but
but
the
problem
that
we
see
is
that
these
subdivisions
go
ahead
and
I
understand
the
reason
for
the
subdivision
here,
but
but
then
we
we
generally
then
see
you
know
after
a
few
years,
people
coming
in
and
wanting
to
fill
every
little
square
footage.
So
there's
nothing
that
is.
Is
there
anything
or
are
there
any
restrictions
that
will
prevent
a
building
going
up
in
that
in?
In
that
lot,.
AU
You
know
I
I
understand
the
question.
Well,
it
would
be
horribly
counterintuitive,
because
we
we
would
not.
You
know
we
would
be
blocking
off
development.
We
would
be
blocking
off
access
to
our
dispensary.
We
would
be
happy
to
have
a
proviso
on
this
parking.
Only
of
that
first
lot
and
you
know
any
other
conditions
that
we
can
think
through.
I
I
just
I
just
don't
see
it.
If
you
go
to
the
existing
editions
photo,
you
get
a
better
sense
of
what
we're
looking
at
here.
We
would.
AU
We
would
be
hard-pressed
to
enjoy
any
support
to
try
to
start
to
try
there,
like
you,
said
man,
I'm
sure,
there's
windows
and
it's
just
it
was
never
contemplated.
The
original
plans
that
we
submitted
to
the
board
had
a
single
lot,
but
then
that
violated
the
buffer
rule.
You
know
the
city's
trying
to
get
52
of
these
in
the
in
this
in
the
city,
so
by
subdividing
it
it
allowed
us
to
to
avoid
that
that
issue.
Okay,
again
we'd,
be
happy
to
have
a
proviso
on
this.
That
says,
for
parking
only.
AV
Good
good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
jessica,
thomas
with
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services,
our
office
hosted
a
robust
community
meeting
on
august
13.
2019.
petitioners
also
met
with
the
boston
cannabis
board
and
received
approval
there.
Since
then,
we've
received
over
150
letters
of
support
from
residents,
neighborhood
associations
and
elected
officials,
including
councillor
janie,
frank
baker,
state
rep,
liz
miranda
and
congresswoman.
Ayanna
presley
we'd
like
to
go
on
record
to
support
the
project.
U
U
AH
AW
R
AX
AX
A
Okay,
so,
given
that
information,
it
sounds
like
we
need
to,
of
course,
make
it
to
this
applicant
only
should
there
be
a
change,
we
would
like
to
see
it,
the
the
renderings
and
the
the
existing
conditions
you
showed
us,
mr
ross
identify
the
need
for
design
review,
and
I
think
the
third
issue
that
we
need
to
address
is
the
parking
parking
dedicated
parking
for
this
business.
On
that
front
lot,
I
don't
know,
are
you
calling
it
lot
a
or
lot
b.
A
AX
AU
AU
A
F
B
B
Okay,
I'm
going
to
call
the
11
30s
for
rediscussion.
Are
there
any
deferrals
or
withdrawals?
Please
address
please
if
you
want
bentham
street,
I'm
sorry
81
wrentham
street
for
the
record
calling
doa
one
zero,
two,
seven
five,
two
one,
eighty
one
to
eighty
one,
a
bentham
street
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
AS
Y
Y
A
B
AG
B
Street
okay,
very
good,
follow
your
next
case,
calling
boa
979,
930
16
whitby
street.
This
is
seeking
to
erect
a
four-story
building
with
10
residential
units
and
10
parking
spaces.
Also
to
combine
two
lots
into
one
lot
of
nine
thousand
square
feet
also
raise
the
existing
structure
on
a
lot
on
a
separate
permit.
The
violations
article
27t
that
five.
This
is
in
the
east-
boston
ipod,
article
53,
section
56.
Our
street
parking
loan
requirement,
article
33,
section,
56.5
point:
a
pocket,
maneuverability
article
53,
section
8,
the
use
is
forbidden,
article
53,
section
9.
B
The
number
of
allowed
stories
has
been
exceeded,
article
53,
section
9,
the
height,
is
it
has
been
exceeded:
article
53,
section
9,
excessive
far,
article
53
section,
9
insufficient,
read
setback
article
53,
section,
54,
screening
and
buffering
that
is
proposed.
53,
section
57.2
conformity
of
an
existing
building
alignment
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
Y
Thank
you,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board
attorney
jeff
drago,
with
an
address
of
11
beacon
street
from
drago
and
toscano,
representing
the
petitioner
carolina
trujillo,
and
we
also
have
amir
from
cripper
studios
as
the
architect
on
the
project.
Just
to
clarify
a
couple
points.
This
proposal
has
changed,
so
the
description
has
changed.
Y
Y
The
plans
that
mr
ehrlich
have
has
reflect
that
there
was
also
a
roof
deck
at
one
time
that
has
been
removed.
Mr
ehrlich,
there
is
a
head
house
that
is
shown
on
those
plans
that
should
have
been
removed.
We
couldn't
get
the
newer
plans
in
early
enough,
but
we
are
going
on
the
record
that
we
will
not
have
a
head
house.
We
can
go
on
as
a
proviso
for
that,
because
there
is
no
need
all
the
roof.
Decks
have
been
removed.
B
Y
Okay,
so
we
were
actually
able
to
remove
two
violations.
Madam
chair,
first
and
foremost,
so
we
removed
the
height
violation
in
feet,
so
we
were
what's
allowable
in
this
area
is
35.
We
are
now
reduced
to
30
feet.
We
were
also
removed.
The
parking
violation
what's
required
in
this
district
is
12
and
we
have
now
13
proposed
spaces
inside
so
both
of
those
were
removed.
The
violations,
if
you'd
like
me,
just
to
continue
on
the
violations
that
are
still
standing.
Y
We
we
do
have
seven
units,
it's
multi-family
residential,
so
that
does
trigger
a
use
variance
our
far,
although
lowered
is
now
1.05
and
0.8
is
what's
allowed
in
the
district
and
then
our
rear
yard
setback
required
would
be
35
and
we're
at
12
feet,
5
inches
in
the
back
of
the
property,
and
I
can
go
into
the
layout
of
the
building
in
the
ground
floor
level,
we
have
the
13
interior
parking
spaces.
We
also
included
a
gym
for
the
this
is
a
condo
building,
so
for
the
residents
of
the
condo.
Y
Y
Y
All
the
units
in
this
building
are
two
bedroom
and
two
bath
units
unit.
One
is
860
square
feet,
plus
a
60
60-foot
terrace,
so
920
feet
total
with
indoor
and
outdoor
space.
We've
got
unit
two.
It's
a
900
square
foot,
two
bed,
two
bath
with
a
170
square
foot
terrace.
So
that's
a
thousand
seventy-five.
Y
A
I
V
Meeting
for
this
project,
where
the
applicant
worked
close
with
the
abandons
modified,
the
proposal
based
on
their
feedback
decreased
the
number
of
units
increase
the
parking
ratio
and
remove
the
four-story
addition
also
change
the
whole
design
of
the
building.
We
also
receive
23
letters
of
support
from
our
parents
and
residents
of
oregon
heights.
Thank.
W
A
B
The
last
case
for
11
30
calling
boa
102
5837
79
regis
road.
This
is
a
change
of
auction
from
a
two
to
a
three
family
and
build
two
shed
dormers,
the
brick,
the
egress
up
to
code
violation,
article
60,
section,
40
austrian
parking
is
insufficient.
Article
16
section,
eight
three
units
use
is
forbidden,
article
60,
section,
nine,
the
lottery
is
insufficient.
Article
60
section
unemployment
ratio
is
excessive.
B
Article
60
section
9,
the
building
has
excessive
stories.
Article
16
section
9,
the
usable
open
space
is
insufficient.
Article
60
section
9,
the
front
yard
is
insufficient.
Article
60
section
I
in
the
side
yard
is
insufficient
and
article
60,
section
9.
The
radio
yacht
is
information
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
X
A
AY
Okay,
there's
basically
no
changes
on
the
plans
that
we
submitted.
Originally
it's
pretty
much
going
to
stay
the
same,
and
it
it
comes
down
to
just
us.
Building
the
dormers
and
and
opening
up
the
egress
areas
for
head
room.
Everything
exists,
the
the
hallways
are
there
for
the
egress
on
both
ends,
so
they
want
to
basically
change
the
floor.
Plan
make
two
two
bedrooms
out
of
it
with
the
addition
of
the
dorm
is
to
let
go
light
in
and
obviously
have
more
around
living
space.
A
AZ
AJ
AH
A
A
A
November
10th
is
back
in
session,
it's
the
fortune.
Please
go
ahead,
but
before
we
do
that,
I
want
to
remind
every
applicant
that
this
is
a
six-month
board
and
you
will
need
five
members
to
be
in
support
of
a
project
for
it
to
carry.
If
you
have
any
questions,
you
may
decide
to
defer
to
another
date.
When
we
have.
I
have
a
fuller.
BA
B
BA
Good
afternoon,
madam
chair
direct
members
of
the
board
attorney
john
paul
genie,
10
forbes
road
in
great
tree
on
behalf
of
the
applicants,
so
we're
requesting
a
deferral
for
68
omar
9th
street.
There
was
some
community
concern
about
density
and
parking.
We
have
reduced
the
size
of
the
building
and
also
added
33
more
parking,
and
we
need
the
opportunity
to
get
back
to
the
dorchester
united
neighborhood
association
to
present
the
updated
drawings.
B
BA
Good
afternoon,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board
attorney
john
palgini
10-4
of
the
road
and
bravery
on
behalf
of
the
apple
team.
Again,
this
is
there's
been
some
changes
to
the
plans,
but
also
there's
a
a
violation
that
was
with
the
existing
house.
That
was
not
cited.
So
we
need
to
correct
that
before
we
can
present
to
the
cba.
O
A
B
B
BB
BB
I
sent
the
board
not
only
the
plan,
but
the
photographs
of
improvements
that
we've
undertaken
here
at
the
parking
lot.
With
the
approval
of
the
south
end
district
landmark
commission,
we
obtained
after
obtaining
approval
from
the
south
end
landmark
district
commission.
We
also
obtained
a
short
form
building
permit
the
inspectional
services
department
and
installed
plantings
and
also
a
fence
at
this
property
in
the
summer
of
2020..
A
Okay,
I'd
like
to
see
counselor
that
the
ownership
make
sure
that
they
maintain
the
plantings,
because
I've
been
noticing
the
other
one
that
we
had
an
issue
with
in
the
south
end
earlier
that
that
you
know
those
need
to
be
consistently
maintained
and
upgraded.
I'll.
Just
put
that
in
as
a
comment,
if
anybody
here
to
speak
in
support
of
this
proposal,.
BC
Good
afternoon,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
faisa
sharif
with
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services,
we
did
hold
a
community
prosperous.
Related
extension
of
this
use.
Butters
were
generally
comfortable
with
the
existing
news
as
the
parking
lot.
We
echo
the
chairs
concerns
about
making
sure
that
there's
a
maintenance
plan
related
to
the
new
planting.
Another
thing
that
did
come
up
from
neighbors
was
related
to
handicap
accessible
parking.
BC
We
understand
that
the
owners
the
operator
maintains
that
they
are
providing
the
appropriate
ratio
as
by
the
state,
the
number
of
handicapped
assessment
spots
that
they're
requiring
there,
but
we
do
ask
the
patients
they
are
adding
another
handicap
accessible
space,
because
there
is
definitely
a
need
in
this
neighborhood
for
that,
particularly
from
the
surrounding
residences.
Thank
you.
B
16
gaston
street,
this
is
a
remote
stairs
for
the
proposed
porch
deck
data
dormer
on
the
third
floor
and
expand
the
roof
deck
the
violation
of
article
nine
section
one.
This
is
a
four
unit
building
in
the
three
f
four
thousand
sub
district
extension
of
the
unit,
four
with
dormer
and
roof
deck
name
and
address
for
the
record.
B
BD
Yes,
this
is
sonya
santos,
owner
of
16,
gaston
street
from
boston
0212,
and
what
I
am
proposing
is
a
dormer
on
the
third
floor
and
a
roof
deck.
The
dormer
is
for
the
purpose
of
raising
the
ceiling
in
the
bathroom
because
of
the
current
without
the
dorma,
the
ceiling
is
slanted
and
a
person
cannot
stand
up
in
the
bathroom.
A
BD
AV
Good
afternoon,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
jessica,
thomas
with
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services.
We
hosted
in
a
butters
meeting
on
october
22nd
during
the
call
director
butters
were
very
supportive
of
the
proposal.
We
also
received
a
support
letter
from
project
wright,
incorporated
and
we'd
like
to
go
on
record
to
support.
W
A
B
AQ
G
AF
Afternoon,
madam
sure,
members
of
the
board,
my
name,
is
shan
salima
barboza.
With
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services.
The
applicant
received
support
from
the
dorchester
north
neighborhood
association.
No
concerns
were
raised
by
the
abutters.
The
mayor's
office
would
like
to
go
on
on
record
and
support.
A
AX
A
A
AH
B
Renovate
the
existing
storage
area
and
convert
to
unit
three
there
are
populations,
article
60,
section,
37:
all
street
parking
is
insufficient.
Article
60
section
8
a
basement.
A
basement
apartment
is
who
didn't
article
60
section
on
the
floor
day.
Ratio
is
excessive.
Article
60,
section
9,
the
usable
open
space
is
insufficient.
BE
BE
Although
this
is
referred
to
in
the
refusal
letter
as
a
basement
apartment,
it
is
in
fact
located
on
the
first
level
and
there
are
three
other
existing
units
located
on
this
first
level.
There
are
no
structural
changes
being
sought.
The
11
unit
apartment
building
is
located
directly
across
from
the
17
acre
almond
park.
There
is
more
than
adequate
on-street
parking
available.
A
BE
A
BE
That
is
not
true,
madam
chair.
There
are
two
units,
I'm
sorry.
There
are
two
windows
and
I
don't
I.
I
cannot
answer
the
floor
to
ceiling,
but
I
do
know
that
it
meets
code
there
are
there
are.
There
are
two
entries
to
the
unit,
I
think
to
speak
about
the
history.
Madam
chair,
a
similar
proposal
went
before
the
zoning
board.
A
I
just
want
to
focus
on
this
because,
as
I
look
at
this
ground
floor
use
the
other
units
look
like
they're,
nice
and
sizable.
This
looks
like
it's
it's
kind
of
on
the
small
end,
I'm
just
looking
at
the
the
drawings
here.
Yes,
so,
let's
just
see
so
so
tell
us
why
we
should
approve
this
and
and
you
you
mentioned
a
twelve
hundred
dollar
per
month.
Rent
I
mean.
Is
this
meant?
How
long
is
this
meant
to
to
last
for
a
one
bedroom.
BE
BE
A
BE
A
A
I
Well,
the
plans
that
I
received
were
only
one
page
and
it
was
just
a
floor
plan.
An
existing
floor
plan,
a
proposed
floor
plan,
it
looks
like
what's
on,
the
screen
is
17
pages,
so
I
guess
there's
I
mean
there
were
no
elevations.
There
was
no
nothing
and
because
of
the
way
it
was
described
in
the
posting
I
assumed
it
was
a
basement
unit.
Mr
the
applicant
is
saying
that
know
that
it's
ground
floor.
A
I
A
BE
A
BF
BF
B
Probably
calling
the
next
case
calling
voa
107
3979
60
windham
road.
This
is
to
remove
an
existing
roof
frame
at
a
second
floor
in
new
roof
range.
The
violations-
article
69
section
9
front
yard-
is
insufficient.
Article
69
section
I
in
the
side
yard,
is
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record.
A
BH
Good
afternoon,
madame
changer
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
danielle
fonseca,
with
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services,
the
new
liaison
representing
high
park.
We
would
like
to
go
on
record
in
support
of
this
proposal.
The
applicant
has
notified
all
abutters
and
we
have
heard
no
concerns
regarding
this
proposal.
We
believe
it's
a
small
project
that
will
not
negatively
impact
the
community.
A
C
B
This
is
a
change
of
oxford
check,
cashing
facility
to
a
cannabis
establishment
modifying
the
existing
layout
and
conditions
of
the
interior
of
the
building
via
links,
article
60,
section,
16
user
regulations
in
neighborhood
business
sub-district,
cannabis
establishment
is
a
conditional
use
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
hello.
AU
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
this
is
mike
ross
attorney
mike
ross
with
the
law
firm
of
prince
lobel,
I'm
here
on
behalf
of
the
applicant
vernon
medical
tito
jackson.
The
ceo
who's
on
the
call
with
us
this
is
solely
the
relief
we're
seeking
today
is
solely
based
on
the
use
itself.
They
used
to
take
this
to
this
existing
photo
structure
at
1589-1593,
which
is
a
laundry
facility
and
a
check,
cashing
facility
open
those
two
parts
of
that
building
and
convert
it
into
an
approximate
5,
000
square
foot.
AU
AU
All
deliveries
will
be
securely
provided
through
the
rear
through
the
rear,
along
that
back
the
leftmost
alley.
We
have
a
rendering
actually
at
the
next
slide,
just
to
quickly
show
you
as
well
as
a
yep.
There
you
go.
That's
just
the
rendering
of
of
kind
of
what
it
will
look
like
at
that
location
and
there's
also
a
one
more
slide
which
we'll
show
you
the
there's
a
surface.
There
you
go.
This
is
the
just
just
a
elevation.
A
AU
Yeah
yeah
this
this
particular
dispensary,
is
actually
probably
about
twice
as
large
as
what
we
previously
went
through
earlier
today,
it's
at
5
000
square
feet.
It's
really
an
optimal
size
to
allow
for
the
demand
that
we
would
anticipate
that
that
upper
right
hand,
corner
of
the
floor
plan,
will
show
you
the
area
where
people
will
do
two
things.
AU
One
is
show
their
id
and
make
sure
that
they're
allowed
to
enter,
but
there's
also
a
desk
there
that
we're
requiring
all
of
our
customers
to
sign
a
good
neighbor
agreement
which
says
that
they
agree
not
to
do
you
know,
smoke
outside
and
other
types
of
things,
otherwise
it
won't
be
allowed
back
once
they
are
security.
They're
allowed
in
that
that's
a
fairly
large
area
to
bring
people
in
there's,
also
a
rope
and
stanchion
internally
to
create
a
line
and
a
queuing
area
to
the
extent
we
need
it.
AU
Probably
the
strongest
strength
of
this
proposal
is
these:
this
bank
of
point
of
sale
systems.
We
have
the
ability
to
really
light
up
almost
a
dozen
point
of
sale
systems
to
bring
people
through
quickly.
That's
the
effect
it
will
have.
We
probably
won't
need
on
any
given
day
that
many
people,
but
if
we
ever
do
we'll,
be
able
to
pull
a
lot
of
people
through
through
the
throughput
and
then
the
rest
of
the
facility.
A
AU
No,
no,
if
we
go
up
one
to
the
original,
that's
right
there
you
go.
If
you
go
to
the
right,
that
is
the
matapan
health
center
and
it
actually
contains
a
cvs
at
the
at
the
ground,
floor,
vision,
specialists
or
whatever.
That
is
there.
That's
that's
going
to
remain
that's
a
buffer
between
us
and
them,
and
that
will
remain
where
it
is.
It's
just
the
check,
cashing
and
the
laundry
that
will
be
converted
into
the
cannabis
establishment.
AU
I
also
should
point
out
to
the
board
that
there
is
kind
of
an
embarrassment
of
riches
with
street
parking
and
municipal
lot
parking,
there's
within
one
block
over
140
off-street
municipal
parking
spaces
and
then
along
the
the
street
itself.
You
all
know
mattapan
square,
there's
46
angled
parking
on
this
block
alone
on
this
side
and
then
on
the
other
side,
there's
39
angled
parking
across
the
street.
I
AU
So
there
was
an
extensive
on
process,
went
through
the
boston
cannabis
board,
where
we
laid
out
our
security
directive
and,
and
the
person
actually
did
that
presentation
is,
is
on
the
call
here
with
us
tito
jackson.
He
has
a
very
strong
grasp
of
his
operations.
I'd
be
happy
to
have
him
speak
to
that
issue.
If
that's
okay,.
P
Thank
you
very
much,
madam
chair.
My
name
is
tito
jackson.
I
live
at
37,
schuyler
street.
I
call
it
roxbury,
you
guys
might
call
it
something
different,
zero,
two
one,
two
one.
So
we
on
the
security
front,
it's
something
that
we're
very
that's
very
important
to
us.
We
are
looking
to
have
a
local
security
company
who
we
partner
with
we've,
been
speaking
to
multiple
security
companies,
including
wescon,
which
is
a
local
minority,
owned
security
company.
P
We
will
have
someone
multiple
people
outside
at
all
times
to
ensure
one
that
no
one
under
the
age
of
21
enters
the
building,
but
two
that
we
have
a
orderly
entrance
into
the
building.
At
all
times.
We
have
a
shared
connection
with
you
relative
to
wanting
people
to
to
be
safe
and
to
absolutely
feel
safe
as
they
enter
an
exit
and
all
of
our
cash
management,
as
well
as
our
product
management,
is
also
based
around
that
issue.
T
AZ
A
A
So
it
sounds
like
you
guys
did
a
good
job
at
at
the
ground
level.
May
I
have
a
motion,
please
motion
to
approve.
Can
we
have
this
with
design
review
and
like
the
previous
one
to
this
applicant?
Only
yes,
we
can.
Okay.
Is
there
a
second
second
joe,
all
those
in
favor
aye?
Thank
you.
Any
opposed
promotion
carriers.
Good
luck,
much.
B
Calling
the
next
case
calling
doa
one
zero,
eight
two
three
four
one:
eight
ready
avenue:
this
is
change
of
auction
from
a
two
family
to
a
three
family
interior
renovations
of
an
existing
basement
and
conversion
into
a
two
bedroom
apartment,
remote
egress
doors
and
egress
windows
at
each
bedroom.
The
violation
of
article
69,
section
29,
austria
parking
is
insufficient.
Article
69,
section
8
uses
forbidden
article
69,
section
8,
the
basement
units
are
not
allowed
article
69
section,
9
additional
load
area
is
insufficient.
Article
69
section
9
on
the
floor
day
ratio
is
excessive.
B
BI
Z
A
A
Okay,
because
I
just
feel
like,
I
can
almost
see
three
mailboxes
so
tell
us
about
the
floor
to
ceiling
height
and
tell
us
about
the
the
floor
to
ceiling
height.
Tell
us
how
what's
what's
the
the
the
gray
difference
between
the
floor
and
the
lowest
sell
of
the
window,
because,
as
I
look
at
it,
it's
just
such
a
pretty
house,
as
is
I'm
just
wondering
why
the
applicant
would
want
to
do
this.
A
I
I
I
understand
that,
but
you
know
please
talk
it
through.
You
know
right,
you
know
it.
It
looks
like
it's.
The
republican
is
getting
very
fair
use
of
this
property
and
that
this
is
just
you
know.
A
massive
extension
that
I
don't
know
will
will
really
support
much
because
it
is
a
forbidden
use,
and
you
know
it's
really
forbidden
in
this
neighborhood
district.
BI
A
BI
BI
The
proposed
renovations
would
cut
into
that
retaining
wall
and
provide
a
walkway
down
to
the
new
entrance
for
this
unit,
and
there
would
be
a
similar
cutout
for
rear
egress
towards
the
backyard
two
windows
at
the
bedrooms
would
be
in.
The
kitchen
would
be
cut
down
with
a
sill
height
of
44
inches
and
will
be
provided
with
a
bilcoe
scapewell
egress
system
so
that
it
meets
all
fire
code
requirements
for
ingress
out
of
the
unit.
A
BI
I
Hi,
the
plans
are
very
confusing.
There's
a
lot
of
contradictory
information,
the
the
things
that
I
always
look
for
like
the
basement
floor
to
grade.
At
one
point,
it
shows
four
foot
one
another
point:
it
shows
five
foot
one
and,
as
the
applicant
said,
it
shows
floor
to
ceiling
height,
seven
foot,
one
which
is
clearly
violation
code.
The
applicant
says
it
should
be
seven,
it's
going
to
be
seven
foot
six,
but
that's
not
what
the
drawing
show.
So
these
these
plans
are
not
adequate
and
it
is
very
much.
A
B
Violations,
article
51
section
8,
basement
apartment
is
forbidden,
article
51,
section
9
a
lot
of
areas,
insufficient
article
51,
section
9
the
floor
day.
Ratio
is
excessive.
Article
51,
section,
9,
usable
open
space
is
insufficient.
Article
51,
section
9,
the
location
of
the
main
engine
shall
face
the
front
log
line
and
article
51
section
56
austrian
parking
is
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
C
BG
A
BG
So
the
proposal
here
is
to
take
an
unfinished
space
on
the
ground
level
that
is
underutilized
and
add
a
new
studio
apartment.
There
are
four
parking
spaces
at
the
rear.
The
picture
there
is
the
front.
We
will
be
that's
nick
jump
in
that
the
the
existing
building
has
three
units
on
the
upper
floors
that
are
two
bedroom.
One
two
bedroom
and
two
three
bedrooms.
BG
BG
We're
proposing
a
new
studio
on
the
ground
level
that
would
have
460
square
feet.
It
has
a
ceiling
height
of
seven
foot.
Six
okay
front
would
have
two
large
windows
in
the
space.
There
are
two
smaller
windows
on
either
side.
This
is
you're
looking
right
now
at
the
existing,
those
two
front
windows
will
be
enlarged.
BG
BG
The
back
would
be
utility
room
and
then
there's
an
exit
out
the
lower
right.
So
this
unit
would
be
entered
off
a
common
corridor
that
would
provide
access
to
utility
rooms,
and
then
this
building
will
have
a
new,
fully
sprinkled.
All
four
units
would
be
having
new
fire
sprinkler
system.
Where
would
none
exist
previously
for
safety,
and
we
have
a
new
sprinkler
room
over
in
the
front
right
corner
of
the
building.
I
They
are
frustrating.
This
is
once
again
an
example
of
an
undersized
unit,
460
square
feet
in
a
basement.
That
is
intended
to
be
a
basement,
and
there
are
no
sections.
There
are
no
elevations
which
always
make
me
suspicious,
because
then
I
can
never
see
what
the
florida
ceiling
height
is.
What
the
what
the
florida
grade
height
is
what
the
floor
is
still
windowsill
height
is
it's.
A
A
In
fact
we
hold
to
that
because
it
looks
like
you
know
if
somebody
was
living
in
that
unit
and
if
there
was
a
fire
right
outside
their
front
door.
You
know
I
you
know,
I'm
fine
with
the
notion
of
sprinkles
and
sprinkler
systems.
However,
there
are
issues
with
this,
so
I'm
perfectly
fine,
because
we
are
seeing
an
increase
in
the
number
of
requests
for
standalone
basement
units
that
that
just
add
density
with
little
value
to
the
community.
BG
I
That's
what
I
mean
and
there's
and
there
ought
to
be
an
elevation
of
the
entire
unit,
because
I
don't
know
what
whether
what
the
topography
is
whether
the
grade
is
level
well,
if
it
just
at
this
point
what
it
is
yes,
fine,
but
what
about
throughout?
That's
what
the
drawing
should
show
you're
an
architect.
You
know
that,
and
I
am
not
prepared
to
act
on
wrong
policy.
A
You
know,
I
think
we
have
to
just
step
back
to
the
more
philosophical
issue,
because
this
lot,
I
think
there
is,
can
you
collect?
Can
you
go
to
the
rear
view
that
showed
the
ducts,
because
I
think
this
look
it'll
show
you
that
it's
fairly
flat
at
this
point,
this
place
at
this
place,
and-
and
so
you
can
see
the
the
dig
out
to
that
second
means
of
egress-
that
is,
that
is
there
by
the
deck.
BJ
Yes,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
connor
newman
with
the
mayor's
office,
neighborhood
services
will
support
this
proposal.
My
office
conducted
a
butters
meeting
on
september
15th.
The
only
concerns
raised
were
a
tenant
also
in
the
building
just
had
questions
about
the
scale
and
the
scope
of
the
construction
because
they
work
from
home.
BJ
The
general
the
applicant
went
on
to
the
bryan
olsen
improvement
association
also
received
their
support
as
well
many
proposals
in
the
austin
brighton
area.
A
lot
of
them
are
big
increases
in
density.
Not
so,
in
this
case
we
think
it's
very
minimal
and
we
think
the
impact
on
the
neighborhood
will
be
minimal
as
well.
We
think
it's
a
great
chance
to
add
an
additional
unit.
BJ
AE
AH
AI
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
annabelle
gomes
from
the
brighton,
also
improvement
association.
We
voted
to
support
this
unit.
We
were
told
that
there
will
be
full-size
windows
in
the
front.
The
side
windows
will
almost
be
full-sized
and
the
ceiling
height
is
7-6
and
what
we
thought
as
a
benefit
to
the
community
would
be
that
the
building
will
be
sprinklered
and
hardwired,
which
is
important
and
a
safety
issue,
and
we
also
feel
that
a
studio
unit
in
a
lower
level
would
be
more
affordable.
AI
AI
A
F
Madam
chairs,
the
board
is
aware
our
formal
recommendation
to
you
was
to
deny
it
without
prejudice,
because
we
did
have
concerns
about
natural
light
in
the
access
to
the
to
the
basement
unit.
I
know
that
mr
o'sullivan
and
nick
have
been
working
with
the
austin
brighton
planner
ever
since
our
board
date
about
a
month
ago,
showing
new
plans
and
echoing
the
comments
that
annabella
had
made
about
full-size
windows
and
getting
more
light
air
in
there.
Our
neighborhood
planner
for
brighton
is
actually.
F
I
I'm
going
to
make
a
motion
for
denial
without
prejudice
which
would
which
would
against
me
my
better
judgment
would
allow
the
applicant
to
go
and
and
redesign.
I
hope
they
could
get
more
square
footage
and
natural
light,
because
this
problem
of
these
underground
basement
apartments
is
getting
increasingly
problematic.