►
From YouTube: Zoning Board of Appeal Hearings 10-31-17
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
Good
morning
the
Board
of
Appeals
Pro,
Tuesday
October
31st,
is
now
in
session.
Just
a
reminder.
Please
turn
off
your
cell
phones
because
because-
and
if
you
have
a
need
to
have
a
conversation,
please
take
it
outside
of
the
room,
it's
very
difficult
for
us
to
hear
the
applicants
up
at
the
table,
in
conformance
with
the
Open
Meeting
Law.
This
is
just
a
reminder
that
this
meeting
is
being
live-streamed
and
will
be
available
online
afterwards.
I
see
some
new
faces
here,
so
if
you're
here
to
speak,
either
in
support
or
in
opposition
to
a
project.
A
A
C
D
E
D
E
Of
appeals,
approval
apparently
unbeknownst
to
me,
the
permit
is
only
good
for
six
months.
This
is
d.
Tells
me
now
is
d
asked
me
to
come
back
and
ask
for
a
new
extension
and
also
to
reapply
for
a
new
permit,
which
I've
done
linking
it
to
the
old
permit.
As
you
can
see
in
the
packages
we
they
granted
us
a
permit.
We
started
construction.
E
F
E
Issued
the
permit
to
the
contractor
in
July
and
they
changed
the
name
to
the
new
contractor
who
didn't
change
the
date
and
they
asked
for
an
extension.
They
said
we
didn't
need
it,
we
started
construction
and
then
somebody
complained
and
they
looked
at
it
and
they
said
well.
This
is
permits
out
of
time.
You
need
it's
so.
E
E
E
A
A
E
A
So
I
I
think
I'm
still
stuck
on
why
this
couldn't
have
been
dealt
with
on
an
administrative
level
at
ISD
I.
Try.
A
A
B
G
G
Relief
I
understand
right,
so
it's
my
understanding
and
Matt
help
me
with
this
a
little
bit
that
we
gave
you
relief.
Our
relief
goes
to
ISD
what
they
do
with
it
from
there
is
on
their
terms.
So
it
seems
to
me
that
we're
getting
pushed
in
and
Anthony
you
can
help
me
with
this-
that
we're
getting
pushed
in
all
we
can
do
is
approve
the
relief,
which
is
what
we've
done.
Okay,
so
I,
don't
know
what
you're
expecting
us
to
do.
What.
F
A
Thing
is
we
the
project?
Why
is
the
project
shuttled
to
us
when
we
have
no
per
view
on
the
building
permit
end
of
things
that
is
purely
an
ISD
ISD
function,
because
you,
the
permit,
was
initially
issued
with
the
zoning
in
place.
So
what
what
happens
at
ISD
to
to
remedy
this
situation
should
happen
at
ISD
I
do.
J
K
My
name
is
Eugene
Kelly
Turner
Eugene
Kelly,
two
to
three
Commonwealth
Avenue
in
Boston,
so
this
was
a
renovation
of
an
existing
back
bait,
townhouse,
a
double
townhouse.
It's
been
ongoing
now
for
a
number
of
years,
it's
being
put
into
a
single
fan
as
a
single
family
home
the
owner.
We
want
to
build,
as
we
were
granted
relief
to
build
a
wall
taller
than
six
feet
to
enclose
the
garden
area
in
the
back.
Yes,.
K
So
the
the
issue
is
is
that
the
construction
is
still
ongoing
and
we
need
to
keep
the
back
open
until
we
finish
the
construction,
so
I'm
looking
for
a
one-year
extension
and
what
what
I
had
done
is
we
had
gone
to
requires
exactly
architectural
Commission
review
or
design.
We
did
go
to
them.
We
got
a
design
approved,
but
it
expired
after
a
year.
So
I
have
to
have
zba
approval
in
place
in
order
to
go
back
to
the
be
BAC
again
before
I.
L
M
B
M
A
A
A
B
A
B
B
N
N
O
B
This
was
this
is
Building
Code,
section
301
point
one.
This
is
chapter
shall
govern
the
approval
and
installation
of
all
equipment
and
appliance
at
the
comprised
parts
of
the
building
mechanical
systems
regulated
by
it
regulated
by
this
code.
This
access
for
maintenance
and
replacement
appliance.
You
shall
be
accessible
for
inspection
service,
repair
replacement
without
disabling
the
function
of
a
fire
resistance
rating
assembly
or
removing
a
permanent
structure.
Other
appliances
venting
systems
or
any
other
piping
or
docks
not
connected
to
an
appliance
being
inspected,
serviced
or
repaired,
or
replaced
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Laser.
F
F
P
P
We
have
three
units
above
us
to
four
tenant
use
in
our
above
our
storefront
that
the
electrical
room,
the
tents,
don't
have
access
to
it,
and
we
were
saying
that
we
occupy
the
space
after
the
building
was
built
after
an
electrical
room,
but
they
have
each
tenant
has
their
own
sub
panels
and
water
meters
that
they
have
access
to
already.
So
the
tenants
don't
need
to
go
to
the
basement.
However,
it's
accessible
for
inspection
and
accessible
for
everything
else
use.
P
F
P
P
P
I
I
mean
I
I'm,
not
sure
if
they,
the
plant
reviewers
reviewing
my
building
only
I
mean
my
plans
for
it
a
store,
that's
what
he
was
trying
to
review
so
I'm,
not
sure.
If
he
didn't
review
like
the
plant,
the
building
of
the
existing
building
when
it
was
built,
you
didn't
pull
the
plans
for
it.
My
my
assumption,
my
I'm
just
only
aware
that
what
I'm
building
from
my
building
and
what
he
supposed
to
be
reviewing
from
my
building
only.
F
P
We've
already
been
completed,
we've
what
we
were
granted
by
ISDN,
a
temporary
CI
Co
to
continue
operations
we've
been
because
of
due
to
the
November
appeal.
We
were
look
thinking
that
that
was
the
only
thing
that
we
needed
a
relief
for
and
then
so
they
allowed
us
to
have
a
temporary
CI,
Co
and
so
we've
been
operating
since
then
and
correct
sir,
and
we
have
inspections
come
in.
F
P
Correct
so
when
we
went
to
the
CIC
on
when
we
got
the
when
we
got
the
variance,
we
were
an
assumption
that
this
variance
will
allow
us
would
be
the
only
thing
that
the
plan
Revere
was
finding
at
fault,
and
so,
when
we
went
back
to
the
plan
reviewer,
they
went
and
said
well,
there's
something
wrong
and
we
didn't
know
why
where's
what
what
what
the
issue
was
the
other
issue.
So
then
what
happened
after
that
is
when
we
went
back
to
the
ISD,
they
took
the
CBA
plans
and
they
chuck
the
original
plan.
J
J
J
J
P
A
B
Q
F
R
B
T
A
B
Call
it
a
9:30
cases.
Are
there
any
deferrals
or
withdrawals
for
9:30
hearing?
None
go
to
the
first
case,
calling
VOA,
seven,
four,
nine
one,
six,
nine
eight.
Seventy
eight
south
street.
This
is
a
demolished
in
existing
one-story
commercial
structure
and
a
two-story
residential
wood
structure.
He
wrecked
a
three-story
nine
unit,
multi-family
residential
dwelling
with
below
grade
parking.
The
violations
Article
67,
section
11,
a
multi-family
dwelling-
is
a
conditional
use
on
the
first
storey
Article
67
section
32
insufficient
off
street
parking,
Article
67,
section
33
2.1
conformity
with
an
existing
building
alignment.
B
I
Morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board
attorney
Nick
Zazula,
McDermott
quilty
and
Miller
28
State
Street,
Suite
8:02
in
Boston,
with
me
to
my
immediate
left,
is
lucha
buco
who's.
The
project
architect
to
my
far
left
is
Christos
core
Titus,
who
is
the
longtime
property
owner
of
878
South
Street.
We've
arrived
to
the
board
today.
A
hearing
memorandum
detailing
the
project
summary
community
outreach
mud
modifications
to
both
the
design
and
the
building
programming.
I
As
a
result
of
extensive
community
comment
and
positive
outreach
with
the
community
on
the
project,
the
property
is
located
on
South
Street
at
the
corner
of
South
Street
and
Walter
Street.
It's
right
right
outside
of
Rosendale
Village.
It's
been
in
Chris
toeses
family
for
about
30
years,
he's
a
longtime
property
owner
in
the
neighborhood.
The
lot
is
it's
an
interesting
lot.
It's
about
7,500
square
feet.
I
It
has
two
buildings
on
it:
an
existing
nondescript,
single-story
cement,
block
commercial
building
with
four
units
at
the
street
side
and
a
two-story
rear
residential
two
family
building
at
the
back
of
the
lot.
So
there
are
two
two
buildings
on
the
lock
currently
and
there's
a
great
chain.
Topographic
change
of
about
six
feet
from
the
street
side
to
the
rear
side.
It's
a
narrow
lot
as
well,
so
that
has
caused
some
issues
with
citing
a
new
and
improved
building
on
the
property.
A
I
A
I
There's
only
one
well,
there's
only
one
commercial
tenant
in
the
building
I
believe
it's
a
barbershop,
correct
and
I
believe
that
they
at
the
the
understanding
with
that
tenant,
is
that
that
gentleman
is
going
to
retire
at
the
at
the
end
of
this
process.
He
was
looking
to
retire,
and
this
is
this
just
makes
sense
on
the
timing
front.
As
far
as
the
residential
tenants
I
believe,
their
leases
will
be
up
before
this
is
constructed
and
they
are
tenant.
Fair
tenants
at
will.
I
A
I
Ma'am,
so
we
are,
we've
been
cited
for
seven
violations.
In
fact,
one
of
the
violations,
the
rear
yard
violation-
has
been
now
removed.
We
are
now
compliant
with
that
rear
yard
violation
due
to
the
reduction
in
off
street
parking
and
pulling
the
building
back
from
the
rear.
The
rear
setback
is
20
feet.
We
are
now
at
23
feet,
9
inches,
so
that
one
of
those
violations
has
been
removed.
The
rest
of
the
violations
for
the
most
part
are
they
are
existing
non-conformities.
The
buildings
on
the
property
are
non
conforming.
I
The
multi-family
dwelling
we
were
cited
for
a
conditional
use
permit
because
of
the
location
and
a
local
convenience
sub
district.
The
residential
use
on
the
first
floor
is
conditional.
However,
as
discussed
as
detailed
previously,
there
is
a
non-conforming
residential
use
on
the
rear,
the
property
on
the
first
floor.
I
Yes,
ma'am,
the
proposed
fer
is
approximately
1.4,
for
the
requirement
is
0.5.
The
buildings
on
the
property
now
are
non-conforming
2fa
are
they
are
not
at
1.44,
but
they
are
over
0.5.
As
far
as
the
building
height,
we
are
compliant
with
the
footage
of
the
building
height,
but
we
are
not
complying
with
the
stories.
It's
two
and
a
half
store
three
stories.
Three
stories
above
a
sort
of
entry.
I
You
know
rear.
The
parking
is
because
of
the
great
change
the
parking
is
technically
below
ground,
although
it's
open-air
parking,
so
we
have
three
storeys
and
required
as
two
and
a
half
stories,
but
we
are
under
the
35
foot
height
requirement.
As
far
as
the
side
yard,
the
10
foot
is
required.
We
are
compliant
on
the
right
side
at
12
feet,
six
inches,
however,
and
that's
where
that's
where
the
driveway
in
the
existing
curb
cut
is
there
is
an
existing
curb
cut,
which
we
will
be
utilizing
on
the
left
side.
We
are
non-compliant.
I
Yep,
as
far
as
the
rear
yard,
again,
we
are
compliant
with
that
and
finally,
in
terms
of
the
off
street
parking
18
spaces
would
be
required
for
nine
units.
However,
as
part
of
the
extensive
community
process,
we
actually
had
a
development
that
had
18
spaces
and
as
part
of
a
lot
of
the
discussion
on
the
project
that
was
just
too
much
and
it's
not
needed
we're
at
less
than
about
a
quarter
mile
from
the
Roz
and
Dale
village
commuter
rail
station.
I
A
I
A
I
J
I
H
I
A
U
Madame
chair
members
of
the
board,
Daniel
Murphy
from
the
mayor's
office
Neighborhood
Services,
like
to
go
on
record
of
support,
will
continue
to
be
PTA
Design
Review.
As
far
as
the
process
is
concerned.
That
she's,
gentlemen
are
correct
in
saying
that
it's
been
extensive
and
throughout
that
process
they
have
worked
to
garner
support
from
not
only
the
local
Civic
Association
and
it
in
addition
to
lots
of
area
residents.
Thank
you.
W
So
good
morning,
members
of
the
board,
my
name-
is
Matt
Lawler
I'm,
a
resident
at
fifteen
Basso
terrorists
in
Roslindale.
It's
about
two
blocks
from
the
project
site,
speaking
in
support
and
speaking
both
on
my
own
behalf
and
on
behalf
of
walk-up
Roslindale
I
believe
walk
up,
brows
and
they'll
submitted
a
letter,
revised
letter
of
support
for
the
project
on
October
26,
which
hopefully
is
on
the
file.
W
One
was
a
suggestion
that
its
support
of
active
mobility
that
the
project
consider
contributing
toward
the
hub
way
expansion-
that's
planned
for
Roz
until
for
the
next
two
years,
so
we
appreciate
the
bicycle
parking
proposal,
but
also
wondering
if
they
would
be
willing
to
commit
to
assist
subway
and
then,
second,
with
respect
to
the
pocket
park,
that's
in
front
of
the
project
there's
been
discussion
about
maintenance
of
that
pocket
park.
We
also
would
like
them
to
consider
bicycle
parking
in
that
pocket
park.
W
If
you
know
the
area
at
all,
there
is
a
very
active
coffee
shop
across
the
street
and
there
is
currently
no
bicycle
parking
in
the
vicinity,
so
we
would
like
them
to
consider
contributing
a
bike
rack
to
that
park
and
then,
finally,
with
respect
to
design
review,
we
appreciate
that
it
would
be
subject
to
BPA
into
the
design
review,
but
we'd
like
to
make
sure
that
that's
continuing
robust
discussion,
especially
with
respect
to
the
entrance
to
the
project
at
the
ground
level.
Thank
you
is.
X
X
Concern
is
with
parking
in
the
neighborhood
I
believe
this
is
going
to
take
away
from
parking
in
the
neighborhood,
which
is
dirty
tight
and
I
have
trouble
every
night
that
I
get
home
if
I
get
home
late
to
find
parking
and
also
I'm
just
afraid
of
what
its
gonna
do
to
my
building.
You
know
my
tenants
their
quality
of
life,
while
this
construction
is
going
on.
A
B
Next,
two
cases
calling
VOA
seven
five:
four
three:
seven:
five
54
to
54
be
Williams
Avenue,
companion
case
VOA,
seven,
five,
four,
three,
six,
nine,
fifty
six
to
56
a
Williams
Avenue.
This
is
for
fifty
four
fifty
four
be
constructing
new
to
family
dwelling
on
an
existing
twenty
five
thousand
two
hundred
seventy
six
square
foot
lot.
This
will
be
one
of
two
dwellings
located
on
the
same
lot:
violations
article
eight
section
7,
a
two-family
is
forbidding
in
a
one
f:
six
thousand
s:
sub-district
article
68,
section
31
screening
in
buffering.
None
is
proposed.
B
This
is
this
is
456
256
a
Williams.
This
is
a
construct,
a
new
to
family
dwelling
on
an
existing
25,000
276
square
foot
lot.
This
would
be
one
of
two
dwellings
on
the
same
law
at
the
violation:
article
8
section,
8
forbidden
news,
article
69,
section:
29.4,
no
parking
allowed
any
required
front
yard
article
69,
section,
30,
a
structure
behind
another
main
structure
is
not
allowed
within
the
sub
district
article
69,
6
and
37
screening
in
buffer.
B
T
This
is
an
existing
polite
house
that
has
been
sitting
vacant
for
over
12
years.
It's
located
on
Williams
Ave
in
High
Park,
it's
diagonally
across
from
the
Boston
Police
Academy
in
between
Police
Academy
and
Truman
Highway.
The
proposal
here
today
is
to
raise
that
building
it's
a
very
large
lot.
The
lot
is
twenty-five
thousand
four
hundred
and
forty
three
square
feet.
Unfortunately,
a
lot
of
shape
like
a
tea,
so
you
know
through
the
community
process
we
went
and
we
went
through
the
whole
thing
about
this.
T
T
Initially
it
was,
this
was
an
issue,
an
existing
for
family.
The
zoning
on
this
was
a
four
to
six
family
residential.
However,
that
zoning
had
expired
when
they
because
it
was
not
being
in
used
and
it
went
to
the
1f
6000
zone
with
respect
to
life
frontage.
The
lot
frontage
in
the
areas
60
feet
required
the
proposals
83
point
seven
for
the
entire
lot
front
setback
is
25
proposed
is
twenty
five
point.
Seven
side
setback
is
ten.
Now
this
is
on
the
front
unit.
On
one
side,
it's
four
feet:
rear
setback
is
forty.
T
We
have
ninety
nine
point.
Nine
height
is
thirty-five
proposed
required
two
and
a
half
stories
that
we
have
thirty
four
point:
five
and
there's
a
finished
attic,
so
it
would
be
classified
technically.
It's
a
three
story.
Hope
usable
open
space,
1800s
required.
We
have
2807
with
respect
to
the
back
unit.
You
have
again
frontage.
Sixty
feet
proposed.
Eighty
three
point:
seven
front
setbacks
25
feet.
This
is
one
hundred
and
twenty
three
point
five
feet.
Back
from
the
street
side.
Setback
is
ten.
T
A
T
T
And
that
was
really
the
problem
when
we
were
going
through
this
process.
Initially,
what
we
decided
was,
you
know
we
met
with
the
elected
officials.
We
had
some
met
with
the
family
hill
neighborhood
association.
Zoning
subcommittee
we've
gone
to
a
pretty
robust
community
process
and
it
was
where
we
gonna
place
these
the
people
who
lived
in
the
back
with
the
ones
who
most
impacted
and
I
know
some
of
them
are
still
opposed
to
it.
T
The
two
units
sit
on
the
back
of
the
tee
and
they
didn't
want
that
because
they
felt
like
was
encroaching
upon
them,
so
we
put
it
behind
and
even
though
it
wasn't
the
best
solution,
because
it
was
such
a
big
lot,
it
was
a
unique
shaped.
Lot
was
to
move
it
down
so
that
it
wouldn't
impact
those
properties
in
around.
T
T
Y
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
Brian
Flynn,
the
mayor's
office
in
Neighborhood
Services,
want
to
go
on
the
record
in
support
of
this
proposal.
Contingent
upon
beat
BPD
a
design
review.
The
site
has
been
a
nice
office
several
years.
In
my
brief
tenure
with
Neighborhood
Services
I've
been
to
several
meetings
where
people
want
something
you
know
they
want
something
to
be
done
to
it.
Just
want
to
go
on
record
in
support.
V
A
Z
A
Z
A
Z
I
really
think
it's
important
to
the
board
that
they
get
a
little
historical
reference
to
a
property
that
those
of
us
who
live
in
Fairmount
Hill
have
been
dealing
with
for
12
years.
If
the
board
is
not
interested
in
that
I'll
move
on
to
some
other
things,
but
where
we're
really
concerned
about
the
fact
that
this
property
has
been
disrespected
for
12
years,
we
each
year
have
to
call
the
city
to
come
out
and
apply
fines
to
this
property,
because
nothing
has
been
done.
Z
So
we're
just
letting
you
know
that
we're
in
opposition
to
that
based
on
primarily
a
house
behind
a
house
which
was
a
foundational
issue
when
we
were
reviewing
the
the
the
zoning
code
for
three
and
a
half
years
ago
in
Hyde
Park,
the
owner
and
the
lawyer
thought
the
lawyer.
Just
yesterday
we
walk
through
the
property
and
there's
broken
glass.
This
boards
with
nails,
there's
trash
I,
mean
it's.
It's
still
an
eyesore
in
a
beautiful
part
of
the
city,
the
lawyer
and
the
owner
have
given
neighbors,
who
may
say
they
want
to
see.
Z
This
plan
occur
only
two
alternatives
and
the
alternatives
keep
the
Beast
and
will
give
you
beauty
will
give
you
two
new
places
that
are
in
fact
zoned
and
that
in
fact,
landscaped
and
look
good.
We
have
another
alternative
from
the
Fairmount
Hill
neighborhood
association
that
we've
been
trying
to
impose
for
many
years,
tear
the
bloody
thing
down
clean
up
the
and
then
start
over
using
using
the
the
lot
to
erect
something.
A
A
Z
Well,
there
are,
and
the
other
variances
of
course
I
mean
you
know
more
about
those
other
variances
than
I.
You
are
the
experts,
I
am
NOT,
but
clearly
all
of
those
variances
that
you
cited
at
the
beginning
are
cause
for
us
to
have
concern
and
displeasure,
but
the
physicality
of
the
of
the
site
has
been
the
primary
issue.
Thank.
Z
AA
AA
Appreciate
mr.
Poole
Ginny's
new
plan
about
bringing
the
two
houses
into
the
center,
not
to
the
side,
because
when
they
were
on
the
side,
they
were
over
towering
over
my
house
and
towering
over
my
neighbor's
house
I
would
like
to
see
one
unit
with
to
one
building
with
two
units
in
it
rather
than
two
buildings.
AA
AB
Morning,
my
name
is
Carol
Campanella
I'm,
23
points
street
and
I
pack,
my
property
directly
abuts
the
property
of
56
million
zap.
My
concern
I'm
not
opposed
to
them
building,
but
I
am
opposed
to
the
number
of
units
they
want
to
build,
because
my
concern
is
my
quality
of
life
with
the
congestion
and
the
noise
and
Williams
AB
right
now
has
a
lot
of
congestion
going
up
and
down
the
street
as
it
is,
and
this
is
going
to
create
more
noise
and
what
congestion
and
these
are.
These
are
three-story.
AB
Three-Bedroom,
condos
and
they're
allowed
two
parking
spaces,
so
there's
a
lot
of
people
that
could
possibly
live
in
here.
My
concern
is
the
noise
and
the
density
and
the
congestion
that
will
bring
to
the
neighborhood,
and
you
know
we
have
to
live
with
this.
They
ain't
one
they
building
one
and
if
we
allow
this,
it's
gonna
happen
in
other
areas,
and
you
know
I'm
opposed
to
this.
Thank
you.
AC
Hello,
my
name
is
Paul
Santos
I
live
on
a
pond
Street
on
the
back
end
and
I
to
do
bullet
points,
but
I
am
you
know
we're
opposed
we're,
not
opposed
to
building
a
building.
We
want.
We
want
to
building
builds,
but
we
don't
want
two
units.
We
don't
want
one
of
unit
behind
the
other
we'd
like
to
see
its
have
one
unit
there
also
the
way
these
plans
are
with
these
two
big
units,
they're,
very,
very
large
structures,
they're,
very
bigger
than
all
the
other
houses
in
the
area.
AC
So
if
this
is
going
to
have
is
people
are
gonna
have
a
well,
you
know,
there's
sunlight,
it's
gonna
be
changed
and
you're
talking
at
least
three
floors
much
bigger
than
anything
else
there,
and
I
too,
am
worried
about
the
condensed
area.
It's
like
a
triangle
there
and
that
those
streets,
so
it's
just
more
congestion
in
that
area.
Thank
you.
AD
Okay,
Robert
McKinnon
on
12
pond
Street
can
see
the
structure
across
the
street
behind
the
building
across
the
street.
My
concerns
with
the
project
I
actually
do
want
to
see
something
built
there,
but
I
think
two
structures
of
the
size
they're
asking
is
a
little
too
much
for
that
space,
especially
since
you're
gonna
have
four
units
what
multiple
parking
spaces
needed
and
they
provide
that
some
on
this
property,
but
they're
gonna
need
some
more
off
the
street
to
actually
remove
some
street
parking.
I
live
on
punch,
B,
there's
very
little
parking
and
there's
a
house.
AD
AD
A
So
counselor
these
are
the
issues.
I
think
you've
heard
them
two
buildings
on
the
same
lot:
lack
of
naval
enos,
the
density
and
the
size.
Can
you.
D
T
The
first,
with
respect
to
the
two
buildings
in
the
same
lot
again
as
I,
touched
on
this
in
the
beginning,
and
some
of
the
people
who
spoke
in
opposition
to
this.
That
was
done
for
the
consideration
of
the
neighbors
in
the
back
to
bring
those
in
bring
them
down
to
Center
them
on
the
loss
that
they
weren't
encroaching
on
and
then,
and
that
was
done
to
the
community
process.
T
In
addition
to
that,
we
also
decided
and
which
came
up
in
as
Ella
zoning
subcommittee
meeting
was
to
deed
restrict
lands,
because
it's
such
a
long
stretch
of
land
between
where
the
structure
is
in
their
houses,
indeed
restricted.
So
no
structure
could
ever
be
built
on
that,
so
that
was
proposed
at
that
time.
We
thought
everyone's
acceptance
with
respect
to
the
size
of
these
buildings.
These
buildings
are
not
even
close
to
there
underneath
the
height
requirement
for.
T
AE
T
T
The
building
itself
has
been
boarded
up.
I
was,
as
they
stated,
we've
just
to
the
community
process.
I
went
last
night
with
them.
We've
been
trying
to
schedule
this
for
a
while
over
the
weekend,
take
it
out
there
and
actually
walk
the
property
and
see
where
the
lines
are
the
new
prop
of
the
new
proposal.
The
building
itself
is
just
boarded
up,
but
like
everything
else,
kids
gain
access,
animals
and
things
like
that.
So
the
house
is
in
total
disrepair,
I'm
sure
mr.
Smith
has
the
pictures
he
provided
to
you.
T
It
is
something
that
you
know.
As
I
stated:
I
grew
up
there.
My
family
still
lives
there.
My
wife's
family
still
is
there.
Everybody
feels
that
this
can
we've
gone
to
a
community
process
with
the
abutters
we
have
Brian
Flynn
from
the
mayor's
office
enabled
services
as
long
as
well
as
Steve
McGuire
from
to
McCarthy's
office.
Were
there.
A
A
B
Your
next
two
cases
calling
vo
a7
for
572
236
Colonial
Avenue
companion
case
boa
7
for
572
638
colonial
Avenue.
This
is
the
36.
This
is
a
new
energy
positive
to
family
semi-attached,
the
violations,
article
65
section
41,
section,
65,
21.5
Audrey
parking
in
design,
article
65,
section,
9
a
lot
areas,
insufficient
article
65,
section,
9,
the
floor
area
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
65,
section
9,
the
height
is
excessive
and
article
65,
section
9
front
yard.
B
AF
AF
L
AF
The
zoning
district
is
3f,
6000
we're
each
each
lot
is
a
two-family.
The
existing
lot
size
for
each
lot
is
3,600
square
feet.
The
required
is
6000,
so
we're
requesting
a
variance
for
that.
We've
met
all
this
side,
yard
back,
yard
setbacks,
floor
area
ratio
is
0.4
and
we're
requesting
a
1
and
then
on
the
height
it's
a
allowed
is
2
and
a
half
stories
35
feet.
The
request
is
for
3
stories
and
39
feet
and
the
front
yard
setback
requirement
is
15.
However,
the
modal
is
10.5.
AF
AF
AH
AF
A
AF
A
AF
AF
A
AF
AI
AF
AH
AJ
AK
C
Morning,
madam
chairman,
this
is
John
Dolezal
from
the
Boston
Planning
and
Development
Agency.
This
is,
as
Scott
mentioned,
a
city
disposition
seeking
to
bring
our
a-plus
green
building
program
to
this
neighborhood
in
Dorchester.
It's
part
of
the
Talbot
Norfolk
triangle,
eco
district.
This
RFP
was
actually
the
product
of
a
community
request
that
we
bring
these
kinds
of
building
practices
to
the
neighborhood.
We
examined
a
number
of
neighborhood
sites
that
the
city
owned
and
selected.
A
G
Like
to
make
a
motion,
first
of
all
like
to
thank
you
for
your
hard
work,
and
you
know
using
space,
that's
that
has
been
formally
empty
and
that
that's
appreciative
in
that
neighborhood
is
close
to
where
I
live.
So
I
think
that
that's
a
it's
a
good
good
opportunity
to
to
to
revitalize
that.
Neighborhood
and
I'm
gonna
I'm
gonna
make
a
motion
to
a
grant
relief
with
continued
BPD,
a
design
review
and
wish
you
good
luck.
A
B
Case
filing
six,
six,
nine
five,
two
three,
sixteen
Nixon
Street-
this
is
a
change
of
our
kids
from
a
guesthouse
since
1946
and
confirm
is
a
three
family,
drawing
the
existing
condition.
It's
the
request,
documents
Inc
and
there's
no
work
to
be
done.
Violations
article
65,
section,
8,
a
3
family
use
in
orbit
is
forbidden
and
a
to
have
five
thousand
sub-district.
An
article
65
section,
41
RF
street
parking
is
insufficient
name
an
address
for
the
record.
Please
a
PSR.
AM
D
D
A
AM
B
Next
case,
following
VOA,
six,
eight
zero,
two
four
zero
eighty
eighty
to
demonstrate
this
is
to
construct
a
new
constructed,
two
story:
car
true
story,
rare
addition
to
an
existing
building.
The
violation
is
article
50,
section
29,
the
ploidy.
A
ratio
is
excessive
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
AN
A
AN
AP
AI
Issue
my
client
has
is
between
82
and
86,
there's
a
empty
lot
that
has
been
used
consistently
by
the
petitioners
for
outdoor
space
for
parties
and
the
light
and
have
left
refuse
on
the
property,
including
grills,
by
reducing
the
rear.
This
space
outdoor
living
space
in
the
rear
of
the
building,
we're
concerned
that
that
will
further
impair
this
lot,
which
impairs
my
client
replied
enjoin
there,
the
property.
A
AN
A
B
Calling
the
next
two
cases
calling
boa
six:
six:
four:
nine
five:
seven:
twenty
nine
Washington
Street
there
is
building
code,
boa
seven,
six,
four,
seven,
two
one:
two,
eighty
nine
Washington
Street
this
is
to
tear
down
an
existing
building
a
direct,
a
new
three-story
commercial
office.
Building
the
violations,
article
65
section
41
la
stream
parking
is
insufficient.
Article
65,
section
8,
the
use
of
office
is
forbidden.
Article
65,
section
9,
the
Lord
area
is
insufficient
article
65.
The
lot
width
is
insufficient
article
65.
The
lot
frontage
is
insufficient.
B
Article
65,
the
forty,
a
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
65
building
height
is
excessive.
Article
65,
the
building
height
number
of
storeys,
is
excessive.
Article
65-69,
the
side
yard
is
insufficient.
In
article
65
section,
nine,
the
rear
yard
is
insufficient.
This
is
a
building
code.
The
violation
is
eight.
The
eighth
edition
of
70cm
our
exterior
walls,
openings
and
exterior
walls
shall
comply
with
section.
Seven,
oh
five
to
seven.
Oh
five
point:
eight
six
window
openings
are
not
permitted
within
a
three
foot
of
the
property
line
in
the
8th
edition,
780
siema,
the
spiral
steel,
Way's
spiral.
B
AQ
A
Thank
you
so
first,
as
is
our
usual,
please
address
the
building
code,
violation,
which
is
refers
to
the
openings
on
the
spiral
stairway.
AR
AR
F
AR
AR
F
D
A
A
D
A
Q
AL
AO
D
AQ
B
B
Tearing
them
and
go
right
to
the
next
case
for
9:30
calling
boa
7,
1
3
5
3
4
26
to
26
a
Dewey
Street.
This
is
to
erect
a
new
to
family
dwelling
on
an
empty
lot.
The
violation
is
article
50
section:
29
Reyat
is
insufficient.
Article
50,
section
29
usable
open
spaces,
insufficient
article
50,
section
29
additional
lot
of
areas,
insufficient
article
50,
section,
29,
40,
a
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
50,
section,
29,
side
yard
is
insufficient
name
and
address
of
the
record.
B
AW
AW
Good
morning
Madame
chair,
my
name
is
Ahmed,
newer
owner
of
newer
construction
and
permitting
I
just
wanted
to
refresh
your
memory
first,
if
I
passed
this
to
the
project
architect,
this
project
was
here
before
use
sometime
in
the
fall
proposed
three
family
we
had
overwhelming
at
the
time,
support
of
the
neighbors,
except
with
one
neighbor
that
was
using
the
owner,
was
sitting
to
my
left,
Lee
Benz
parking
and
that
has
been
resolved.
Joshua
Mike
Laden
was
there
on
our
second
year.
AW
Second
neighborhood
meeting
we
had
an
overwhelming
the
neighbors
are
excited
and
I'll
have
the
architect
to
talk
to
talk
about
the
proposed,
however,
just
wanted
to
say
if
I
may,
the
owner
sitting
on
my
left
is
an
immigrant,
hard-working
immigrant
trying
to
build
this
property
for
his
family.
No
one
else
and.
A
AV
AV
D
J
AO
D
AP
B
A
AX
O
AX
A
B
Boa
seven:
four:
nine
five,
seven
one
three
Wall
Street:
this
is
a
change
of
large
from
a
one-family
to
a
two-family
construct,
a
roof
dormer
install
stairs
from
the
second
floor
to
attic
and
stairs
from
the
first
law
to
basement
violations.
Article
50,
section
29,
excessive
fa,
our
article
50
section
29.
It's
a
insufficient
open
space,
article
50,
section,
29,
insufficient
Reyat
setback,
an
article
50
section,
29
insufficient
lot
size
for
additional
unit.
They
even
add
the
full
erected.
Please
Elizabeth.
AY
A
A
AY
AY
F
J
N
A
AM
AP
BB
B
Boa
seven,
two
three
four
three:
seven
twenty
cirrus
tree:
this
is
a
change
of
a
youth
building
from
16
units
to
32
units
for
violations.
Article
50,
section,
43
law
street
parking
is
insufficient.
Article
50,
section
29,
the
law,
D
area
for
additional
drawing
units
is
insufficient
in
article
50,
section
29,
usable,
open
space
is
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
attorney.
BC
A
BC
This
building
is
currently
a
16
unit.
Building
there
are
eight
two-bedroom
units
in
the
building
and
there
are
eight
one-bedroom
units
in
the
building,
we're
actually
proposing
now
to
create
28
small
sized
units
in
partnership
with
the
Pine
Street
in
this
is
a
site
that
my
clients
have
decided.
What
they
want
to
do
is
to
partner
with
Pine
Street,
to
create
housing,
for,
as
it
says,
older
Bostonians
who
don't
have
accessible
units.
This
will
be
completely
elevated.
BC
Building
all
floors,
it'll
be
sprinkled
building,
it
will
have
air
conditioning,
it
will
have
management
in
the
building
during
the
day
every
day,
from
Pine
Street
there'll
be
a
laundry
facility
in
the
building,
as
well
as
well
as
storage
in
the
basement.
So
what
we're
proposing
to
do
the
use
of
the
building
is
not
a
violation.
The
existing
violations
exist
as
it
currently
stands
right
now
the
building
is
vacant,
so
in
its
current
status,
the
maximum
occupancy
of
this
building
would
be
48
people.
BC
BC
BC
We're
looking
at
it,
the
units
are
around
three
hundred
square
feet
per
unit,
which
is
consistent
with
the
other
projects
that
Pine
Street
has
at
the
st.
Peters
project
on
Bowden
Street
and
a
few
of
the
other
projects
in
the
neighborhood.
So
they
they've
come
up
with
what
they
think
is
a
workable
design
and
very
manageable.
I
think
what
they
find
is
that
they
have.
BC
They
have
residents
who
are
aging
in
place
on
the
third
floor
of
a
three
family
and
they're
having
trouble
with
the
stairs
or
people
who
are
in
different
other
locations,
that
it
needs
services
that
they
can't
get
to
because
they're
all
in
different
locations.
So
my
clients
own
the
building
next
door,
and
they
we've
also
talked
to
the
abutters.
We
had
a
sidewalk
meeting,
which
was
attended
very,
very
well
and
in
favor
and
we've
also
met
with
the
mayor's
office
and
the
local
Civic
Association.
So
the
violations
exist
currently,
there's
nothing.
BC
A
BC
BC
A
gut
rehab,
it's
my
client,
besides
being
local
residents,
they'll,
also
local
business
people.
Mr.
Alexander
owns
an
HVAC
company
called
general
air
and
they
employ
members
of
103,
the
plumbers
Union
and
the
pipe
that
issue.
He
runs
a
union
shop
in
Roxbury
where
they
live.
They
certainly
provide
great
wages.
BC
BC
AK
Will
be
refrigerator,
the
I
I
had
took
a
tour
of
the
Grady
building
on
Walnut
Avenue
near
Franklin,
Park
that
the
Pine
Street
manages
and
those
units
have
stove
tops
electrical.
That
are
time
that
a
time
and
they
also
have
a
convention
of
it,
a
convection
of
it.
So
they
are
able
to
use
that
and
then
there's
a
common
kitchen
that
has
a
full
kitchen
with
stove
oven
and
a
full
kitchen
on
the
floor.
BC
Is
a
sink
they
design
it
with
a
granite
countertop
for
low
maintenance,
two
burner,
stove,
convection,
oven
and
a
sink
and
a
full
refrigerator.
They
don't
show
the
appliances
in
these
bearings
are
you
know,
I
know
that,
but
it's
a
full
refrigerator.
Nothing
under
the
counter
would
allow
people
to
actually
shop
for
a
week
or
two
at
a
time
and
have
Lodge
freezers.
BC
A
BC
And
it's
each
person
who
would
be
a
resident
of
this
building
would
have
a
one-year
lease
with
Pine
Street
Pine
Street
would
have
20
year
lease
with
my
clients.
They
are
looking
to
take
most
of
the
new
residents
for
this
site
from
existing
sites
where
the
people
are
need
and
now
need
an
elevator.
Now
don't
need
as
much
space
or
whatever
directly
across
from
this
site
is,
is
Franklin
Park.
BC
BC
So
we
need
to
get
the
relief
from
the
board
for
the
design
of
the
project
in
order
to
for
them
to
take
the
next
step
and
then
go
ahead
and
they've
secured
the
funds,
but
we
haven't
signed
the
lease
yet
also
because
of
the
enormity
of
the
construction
here
and
the
you
know
an
elevator
that
goes
really
from
the
basement
to
the
fourth
floor.
The
construction
time
is
has
to
be
factored
into
the
commencement
date
of
the
lease.
It's.
A
I
I
guess
the
question
we've
asked
other
applicants
when
they've
come
in
with
proposals
like
this
is
that
the
relief
goes
and
I.
Think
that's
where
Murray
was
trying
to
get
to
is
that
the
relief
goes
with
the
building,
not
with
the
applicant,
not
with
the
lease.
So
the
question
then
becomes
is
after
20
years.
You
know.
Should
Pine
Street
decide
not
to
renew
the
lease
we
have
very
substandard
units
available
to
the
public
and
and
I
think
that
that
is
a
question
we
ask
every
applicant
who
comes
in
with
these
kinds
of
proposals.
I.
A
A
BC
BC
A
The
relief
goes
with
the
building,
so
the
writing
might
be
there
for
the
next
50
years,
but
the
but
Pine
Street
may
decide
to
be
there
for
20
years
right
and
then
these
these
units
go
to
the
open
market
and
they're
very
substandard,
and
we
need
to
understand
what
happens.
We
do
not
want
the
neighborhood
all
of
a
sudden
to
be
flooded
with
substandard
when
there
might
be
more
of
a
demand,
for
you
know:
two
bedroom
three
bedroom
units
largest
size
unit.
BC
BC
A
AZ
BC
AP
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
Joshua
McFadden
merits
office,
Neighborhood
Services
white
oak
on
record.
In
support
of
this
project.
We've
met,
we've
had
an
abundance
meeting
that
went
very
well,
everybody
they
came,
I
was
in
support.
I
know
the
applicants
are
have
met
with
the
guys
in
charter
Neighborhood
Association
as
well
as
we
would
like
to
be
in
support
of
this
budget.
AP
A
AZ
G
BC
A
A
G
A
BC
A
B
B
D
B
1
8
3
9,
4
36,
the
36,
a
Hebert,
haver
foot
street,
there's
a
companion
case,
boa
seven,
one,
eight,
three,
nine
seven.
Thirty
eight
to
thirty,
eight,
eight,
a
hammer
foot
Street.
This
is
the
36:36
saying
this
is
a
construct
in
addition
in
the
red
and
then
change
our
charming
single-family
at
number
36
to
a
two
family
resident
at
36
36,
a
in
according
with
supplanted
plants
of
two
thousand
five
hundred
and
nine
square
feet.
This
is
one
family
and
a
one
family
with
deck.
The
violations
violations.
B
Article
10
section,
one
limitation
of
parking
area,
Bufferin
article
55,
section,
nine
in
submission
lot
area,
article
55,
section:
nine,
excessive
fa,
our
article
55
section,
nine
insufficient
ray
got
setback,
article
55,
section,
nine,
insufficient
side,
yard
setback,
equal
fifty-five,
section,
foggy
austria,
parking
and
loading
requirements.
Parking
in
any
portion
of
the
front
yard
is
not
allowed.
B
This
is
for
38
38,
eight
Havis
haver
foot
street.
It's
a
partial
demolition
of
a
structure
in
the
rail,
then
change
actually
from
a
single-family
to
a
dentist's
office
to
a
two-family.
The
violation
is
article
9,
section
2,
a
non-conforming
use
change
article
10,
section
1
tweening
and
buffering
article
55
section
9
insufficient
of
additional
lot
area;
article
55
section
9,
excessive
fer
article
55,
section
9,
insufficient,
open
space;
article
55,
section
40,
our
street
parking
loading
requirement
parking
any
portion
of
the
front
required
front
yard
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
B
BD
So
I
am
the
architect
for
the
project,
and
so
my
client
intends
to
improve
and
revitalize
this
neglected,
Dubois
lapidaire
property
with
the
addition
of
one
residential
unit
on
each
lot,
replacing
the
existing
commercial
units
building
within
that
same
footprint.
So
we've
received
approval
from
the
Jamaica
Plain
Neighborhood
Council
and
zoning
committee,
and
we
have
the
full
support
of
the
neighbors.
A
BD
The
the
additional
square
footage
as
I
said,
is
again
kind
of
built
on
the
existing
footprints.
There
will
be
a
on
the
36
side
of
the
property.
There
will
be
a
159
square
foot,
three-bedroom
two-and-a-half-bath
units
on
the
38
side
of
the
property.
There
will
be
1,000
square
foot,
two-bedroom,
two-and-a-half-bath
units
and
parking.
That
was
something
that
we
addressed
at
the
neighborhood
council
and
we've
looked
into
that
and
what
we
kind
of
came
to
a
conclusion
on
was
0.5
per
per
property
or
per
per
lot.
So
it's
one
unit
per
two
units
on
each
lot.
A
BD
We
had
applied
for
one
space
on
the
36th
side
and
two
on
the
thirty-eight
side
and
the
way
that
it
was
originally
laid
out.
It
was
the
parking
was
somewhat
in
the
front,
the
front
yard.
So
we've
made
an
adjustment
to
the
plan,
/
feedback
from
the
the
neighborhood
council,
and
now
we
have
both
of
those
individual
spaces
on
each
side
of
the
property
pushed
back
from.
A
E
BE
BF
BH
B
Boa
seven:
two:
five:
two
three
five
one:
four
team
in
dentistry,
140
million
Street
yesterday:
this
is
a
proposed
roof
addition
and
a
D
at
a
three-story
rare
edition
and
new
balconies
and
decks
the
violations.
Article
55
section:
nine:
the
floor
da
ratio
is
excessive.
Article
55,
section
nine
usable,
open
spaces,
insufficient
article
55,
section:
nine
side
yard.
Is
it
sufficient
name
an
address
for
the
record?
Please
my.
BI
A
BI
BI
BE
BJ
A
BK
Yes,
good
morning,
my
name
is
Carlos.
Guerra
I
live
in
142
million,
a
Street
for
20
years
and
I'm
no
agree
about
this
plan
because
they
first
they
don't
have
enough
land
and
gonna
block
the
view,
and
we
have
a
school
in
the
front,
no
enough
parking
for
people
who
they,
whatever
they
plan,
to
build
right
there
and
I'm.
No
supportive.
A
BI
A
BL
A
B
You
following
VOA,
seven,
four:
six:
zero:
three:
four
839
albany
stream:
this
is
his
stall
to
commercial
grade.
Eight-Foot
black
mesh
chain-link
fence,
with
gates
on
both
ends
in
the
private
owned,
Pike,
Street
and
interest
in
intersect
fellow
street
at
the
north
end
of
Albany
Street.
In
the
south
end,
the
violations
article
to
a
Fed
site
is
required.
Reyat
setback
cannot
be
more
than
six
feet
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
yeah.
AM
A
BM
We
actually
filed
for
a
pyramid.
You
know
we
actually
have
an
eight-foot
fence,
a
six-foot
fence
up
at
the
present
time
in
the
permit
was
was
granted,
but
we
actually
have
an
8-foot
fence
so
when
they
filed
for
the
permit,
we
got
the
wrong
permit.
So
the
contractor
had
gotten
the
wrong
permit.
So
that's
where
we're
at
violation.
We
actually
have
the
fence
in
place
and
all
that's
in
place.
We
just
mirrored
the
fence.
That's
there
now,
which
is
water,
and
so
it's
an
8
foot
fence.
So
all's
we're
asking
for
is
relief
of
that.
D
J
J
BM
F
BM
D
A
BM
A
F
BM
J
J
BM
BM
J
J
BM
G
BM
BM
A
A
You
have
to
make
a
decision.
Are
you
going
to
go
six
or
eight?
If
you
have,
if
you're
going
with
a
six
foot,
then
you
draw
the
comic,
we
deny
it.
If
you
go
through
eight
feet,
then
you
need
relief
from
us
and
perhaps
you
would
need
to
look
at
some
other
material
rather
than
that
chain-link
fence.
So
those
are
the
options
up
in
front
of
you.
So.
BM
G
What
I'm
saying
to
you
is
we're
trying
to
be
clear
here.
What's
going
on
all
right,
we
try
to
get
understanding
of.
What's
going
on
you're
telling
us
that
you
have
a
six
foot
fence
that
should
have
been
an
eight
foot.
If
you
wanted
an
8
foot
fence,
you
wouldn't
need
I'm.
Sorry,
if
you
want
an
8
foot
fence,
you
would
have
needed
relief,
ok,
yeah!
So
the
2
feet
that
you
were
talking
about.
You
need
a
relief
for
all
right,
you're
coming
in
front
of
us
asking
us
for
relief.
AP
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
Joshua
McFadden
mayor's
office,
Neighborhood
Services.
We
actually
are
in
support
of
the
8
foot
fence
and
know
the
applicant
came
to
us.
He
also
reached
out
to
both
butters.
There
aren't
too
many
residential
voters
in
the
area.
As
of
right
now
we
definitely
I
supported
the
8-foot
fence.
8-Foot
fence
at
this
location
is.
D
A
A
A
B
B
A
A
AH
We
do
have
24
dedicated
spaces,
along
with
the
building
and
I,
have
some
printouts
here
of
George
Street
in
Norfolk
Street,
which
are
the
two
streets
that
but
our
property,
which
are
clear
and
open
on
the
weekends.
When
we'll
be
doing
most
our
business
and
also,
we
expect
that
a
large
percentage
of
our
clients,
he'll
will
be
using
uber
and
lyft
and
other
transportation
services
are
not
actually
driving
and
parking.
So
we
believe
that
we
have
sufficient
solution
for
parking
between
the
spaces
that
are
deeded
and
the
street.
AH
A
AP
Greetings,
madam
chair
members
of
the
boy
Joshua
McMahon,
mayor's
office,
Neighborhood
Services.
Why
do
going
Rincon
and
support
this
project?
The
applicant
actually
met
with
a
butters
very
early
on
in
this
process,
garnered
the
support
of
orchard
parks,
orchard
gardens
on
as
well
as
st.
Pat's,
Neighborhood
Association,
as
well
as
Mount
Pleasant,
Neighborhood
Association.
So
they
definitely
end
I.
Believe
DSN
eyes
will
so
they've
done
their
due
diligence
on
me,
the
community
on
this
project,
and
we
definitely
support
them
what's
process.
Thank
you.
BO
B
A
B
V
B
B
T
B
BP
Morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
Richard
Lin's
1216
beddings
of
Street
East
Boston
on
behalf
the
petitioner,
we
are
still
in
the
article
80
process.
We
expect
to
have
some
movement
on
this,
hopefully
at
the
next
BPD
a
board
meeting,
at
which
time
we
can
proceed
with
our
really
professor
relief
before
this
board.
BP
AE
B
B
S
Please
good
morning
my
name
is
Mike
Ross,
an
attorney
with
Prince
Laval
I
represent
at
29
hexagon
Inc,
so
rather
LLC.
We
would
like
to
have
the
board
entertain
a
deferral,
there's
a
lot
of
attention
on
this
particular
proposal.
As
you
can
see
from
some
of
my
friends
in
the
room,
we
think
a
couple
more
weeks
would
help
us
through
the
community
process,
and
we
welcome
a
deferral
now.
A
As
you
can
see,
we
have
other
items
on
the
agenda
just
to
clarify
for
everybody
that
when
the
applicant
requests
a
deferral
it
is
granted,
because
we
understand
that
there
is
continued
processes
that
need
to
continue.
So
please,
once
the
decision
has
been
made
by
this
board.
We
ask
that
you
quietly
leave
the
room,
so
we
can
hear
the
next
person
in
line
okay.
AO
A
AO
F
R
B
BQ
D
F
C
B
Back
to
the
1030
cases,
call
my
first
there's
no
more
with
Charles
the
deferrals
for
11:30
on
the
first
case,
boa
seven,
three,
four,
seven,
four
five:
three:
ninety
four
case
tree
just
a
construct,
a
rare
addition
to
the
property.
The
violation
is
article
27
s
section
five.
This
is
in
the
South
Boston
iPod
applicability,
article
68,
section,
29,
Bruce,
trucked,
the
restricted
district
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
Morty.
BR
BN
D
BR
You,
madam
chair
there,
actually
it's
an
existing
tree,
a
family
building,
there's
no
proposed
change
of
occupancy.
There
is
a
proposed
rear
addition,
including
a
new
rear,
egress
stairway.
There
are
two
citations
here:
article
27
s,
South
Boston,
iPod
applicability,
as
well
as
a
cited
violation
under
article
68
section.
29.
Excuse
me
for
restricted
route
structure.
District.
BR
The
work
being
done
consists
entirely
of
an
addition
to
the
rear.
That
would
be
approximately
15
feet
deep
by
eighteen
and
a
half
feet
wide.
It
is
dimensionally
compliant.
There
is
a
proposed
roof
deck.
The
roof
deck
is
10
by
10.
It
has
I'm.
Sorry,
it's
a
it's
accessed
by
a
stairway
up
to
a
hatch,
and
there
is
an
existing
head
outs
on
the
building
that
will
remain,
but
that
is
not
a
head
house
that
is
being
proposed
to
access
the
roof
deck.
BR
BR
It's
just
the
third
unit,
it's
just
a
unitary
roof
deck
and
my
point
where
I
was
going
on
the
on
the
dimensions,
location
and
amount
of
the
roof
area
occupied
by
the
deck
I,
don't
believe
that
it
actually
is
in
violation
of
68
29
68
29
may
have
been
cited
for
alteration
of
an
existing
roof
profile
and
I
would
point
out
that
the
design
of
the
addition
doesn't
change
the
existing
roof
profile.
It's
a
flat
roof.
The
addition
in
the
rear
is
also
a
flat
roof.
BR
The
deck
does
change
the
profile,
but
not
to
the
extent
that
it
exceeds
the
the
requirements
under
article
68
29
in
the
case
that
that
we
are
considering
the
roof.
Deck
is
violative
of
sixty
eight
twenty
nine
as
a
conditional
use
standard,
so
essentially
we're
looking
for
iPod
compliance
as
well
as
a
conditional
use
permit
only
to
the
restricted
roof
structure
in
terms
of
the
addition
and
what
it
does
for
the
building
of
the
building's
occupancy.
It
goes
from
a
three
unit.
Five
bedroom
build
into
a
three
unit:
seven
bedroom
building.
BR
The
addition
adds
approximately
two
hundred
seventy
eight
of
square
feet
per
floor
plate
right
now.
The
three
units
are
approximately
nine
hundred
eighty
nine
square
feet.
Each
just
based
upon
the
size
are
the
floor.
Plates
at
989
square
feet
the
resulting
floor
plates
with
the
rear
addition
would
be
twelve
hundred
sixty-seven
square
feet.
A
BE
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
John
Allison
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services
due
to
this
being
cited
within
article
68,
even
though
it
is
within
the
interestingly
interpreted
group
structure,
restricted
section,
we
cannot
go
on
record
in
support
of
this
project.
We
do
want
to
acknowledge.
There
was
a
community
process
on
this
and
they
did
resolve
issues
with
their
neighbors.
Thank
you,
madam.
BH
Chair
members,
what
Paul,
Sullivan
okay,
so
the
council
applause,
Michael
Flaherty,
article
68,
went
through
an
extensive
community
process
and
the
council's
approach
has
been
consistent.
We
cannot
support
variances.
However,
there
are
times
these
branches
saw.
It
may
be
considered
a
substantial
hardship.
Therefore,
we
would
refer
to
the
board's
knowledge
and
wisdom
for
understanding
interpreting
zoning
laws
as
it
pertains
to
unnecessary
and
unintentional
hydros.
BH
F
G
B
The
next
case
calling
VOA
seven
five,
six,
two
nine
seven
246
to
248
West
Broadway.
This
is
the
change
of
use.
Takeout
dine
and
salad
restaurant
promised
to
application
request
for
outdoor
seating.
The
violation
is
article
68,
section:
seven
large
takeout
restaurant
uses
forbidden
in
this
zoning
sub
district
article
27
s,
section:
five
in
the
South
Boston
iPod
applicability,
article
68
section:
seven
restaurant
used
as
conditional
article
68
section;
eight,
the
flirty
a
ratio
is
accept
excessive,
extending
the
restaurant
use
into
the
basement
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
good.
BR
Morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
George
Moran,
see
I'm
attorney
with
the
business
address
of
350,
West,
Broadway
and
South
Boston.
The
building
in
question
is
a
mixed-use
building
at
246
West
Broadway.
It
was
approved
by
this
board
with
the
ground
floor
of
commercial
shell
space
in
September
of
2016.
BR
The
building
is
now
occupied.
This
is
the
first
tenant
proposed
for
the
ground-floor
commercial
space.
It
is
a
takeout
restaurant
use.
The
name
of
the
restaurant
is
shredded.
It's
a
salad.
Restaurant,
the
given
the
dimensions
of
the
space
constitutes
a
large
restaurant
or
a
large
in
a
large,
take
out
under
the
zoning
code
because
it
exceeds
1,000
square
feet.
It
is
again
the
existing
square
footage
of
the
space
that
was
approved
by
this
board
in
2016.
The
extension
comes
from
an
extension
of
food
prep
areas
to
the
basement.
BR
The
basement
was
originally
programmed
as
storage
for
the
commercial
unit.
It
is
still
going
to
be
used
as
storage,
but
there
is
food
prep
areas
in
the
basement
which
creates
the
additional
F
AR
violation,
but
the
building
itself
is
not
being
expanded
in
any
way.
The
violations
again
are
attributable
to
the
fact
that
it
is
a
large
take
out
and
the
fact
that
it
is
a
restaurant.
Although
the
zoning
is
in
fact
M
F
ro
s,
multi-family
residential
local
service.
In
there
this
is
West
Broadway
and
the
fact
of
the
matter
is
ground-floor.
BR
BR
A
BR
A
BR
Signage
will
have
to
comply
with
the
assign
code,
so
that
would
be
part
for
this
to
be
approved,
of
a
br,
a
to
work
out
under
its
design
review,
Authority
and
my
and
my
clients,
my
clients
and
business
partners.
They
have
an
experienced
chef
who
was
aware
of
the
takeout
requirements
in
the
city
of
Boston,
both
by
this
board
and
the
licensing
board,
and
we're
aware
of
the
provisos
that
would
run
with
the
takeout
operation.
BE
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
John
Ellison
mayor's
office,
Neighborhood
Services.
This
is
within
article
68,
but
it
is
on
Broadway,
which
may
be
reasoned
at
some
point.
We
did
have
an
abutters
meeting
on
this
and
it
also
went
to
the
st.
Vincent's
Neighborhood
Association.
This
is
a
use
consistent
with
what
people
want
to
see
on
Broadway.
Thank
you
here.
BH
Sullivan
Josh
Michael
Flaherty
I
appreciate
your
patience
with
this
article
68
went
through
an
extensive
community
process
and
the
council's
approach
has
been
consistent.
We
cannot
support
the
variances.
However,
there
are
times
that
these
ranches
saw
it
may
be
considered
substantial
hardship.
Therefore,
we
defer
to
the
boys,
knowledge
and
wisdom
for
understanding
interpreting
the
zoning
laws
as
it
pertains
to
unnecessary
and
unintentional
I
chose.
BH
F
BA
B
You
next
case
calling
boa
seven:
three:
six,
nine
three:
seven
52
Beacon
Street.
This
is
a
change
arch
from
ten
residential
units
in
two
offices
to
seven
residential
units
renovate
the
existing
building
with
adding
an
existing
building
to
increase
to
FAI
two
roof
decks,
one
for
unit
5
and
one
for
unit
7.
The
violation,
article
15
section:
1
of
the
phylidia
ratio,
is
excessive
in
article
32,
section
32
for
sheet
cod
ground
water
conservation,
overlay,
district
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
Madam.
BS
Chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
Jessica
meadow
I'm,
an
attorney
with
Cole
Simmons
stores,
business
address,
400,
Atlantic,
Avenue
Boston
I'm
here
today,
on
behalf
of
petitioner
and
joining
me,
is
the
developer:
Scott
Dabney
of
Pangaea
management,
corporation
and
John
Day
of
Lda
architecture.
We're
aboard
the
board
today,
because
the
proposed
redevelopment
of
the
property
of
52
Beacon
Street
in
the
Beacon
Hill
neighborhood
of
Boston
requires
belief
in
the
following
manner.
O
A
BT
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board
would
like
to
go
on
record
of
support.
Well
just
saw
her
with
the
mayor's
office
of
Neighborhood
Services
we
held
in
a
butters
meeting
in
which
residents
came
out
supporting
one
another
or
representing
one
another,
and
none
of
them
had
all
the
questions
and
concerns
were
answered
and
they
were
comfortable
with
the
idea
they
have
the
owners
contact
numbers,
so
the
Beacon
Hill
Civic
Association,
is
also
as
part
of
this
project.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
A
BG
Ladies
and
gentlemen,
Derrick
Taff
I
am
an
immediate
at
butter.
I
have
interacted
with
the
group
a
lot
and
they
I'm
at
51,
Beacon,
Street
they've,
provided
us
a
lot
of
information
and
we've
worked
through
a
neighbor
agreement
with
th
CA
that
we
think
is
sufficient
to
assuage
our
concerns,
so
we're
supportive
of
the
project.
A
A
B
Four:
nine:
nine
zero
three
127
child
Street.
This
is
a
change
like
from
a
six
apartments.
Dryclean
a
drop-off
office
space
to
six
apartments,
dryclean,
a
drop-off
in
retail,
store,
replace
the
existing
signage
with
the
same
dimension;
no
work
to
be
done;
violations
article
eight
section
for
a
local
retail
is
forbidden
in
the
use
of
an
h.265
sub
district
name
at
name.
An
address
for
the
record.
Please.
BO
BU
Say
on
a
brand
called
parodies,
so
it's
women's
clothing
brand
and
all
the
pieces
transition
to
different
articles
of
clothing.
So
we
make
you
go
from
one
setting
to
the
next
like
work,
workout
or
night
out
so
it'll
be
a
very
minimalistic
setting
with
a
lot
of
plans.
So
it'll
be
more
of
a
pretty
garden
like.
BT
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board
to
supper
with
the
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services,
we
would
like
to
go
on
record
in
support.
We
met
with
the
abutters
and
they
were
all
kind
of
excited
about
the
new,
the
new
trendy
outfits
and
also
just
having
this
this
new
space
reactivated
as
a
retail
store,
instead
of
what
it
was
before.
So
the
the
neighborhood
is
very
excited
about
having
them
here
and
the
Beacon
Hill
Civic
Association
is
also
in
support.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
BS
AE
A
D
B
To
go
to
the
next
two
cases,
calling
boa
75010
for
126
West,
Newton
Street,
there's
a
companion
case
on
building
code;
boa
seven:
five:
zero
one:
zero
three
one:
twenty
six
West
Newton
Street!
This
is
the
reconstruct
and
enlarge
an
existing
access
halfway
and
roof
tech,
a
constructed
rear
deck,
the
violations,
article
64,
section,
nine
extension
to
interior
yards
the
balcony
above
the
first
floor
is
conditionally
ocean
shall
require
relief
from
the
Voynich
joining
Bulova
pails
beer.
With
me
on
the
building
code,
there's
quite
a
few
of
them
and
I'm
gonna.
B
A
B
Okay,
I've
tried
to
like
I,
say
minimize
to
the
points
here.
The
bullet
points
stay
away
to
roof
and
buildings
for
more
stories
above
grade
playing
on
one
stand,
we
shall
extend
to
the
roof
surface
unless
the
roof
of
a
slope
is
steeper
than
four
unit
vertical
or
twelve
units
horizontal
roof
access,
where,
if
stairway
is
provided
to
a
roof,
access
to
the
roof
shall
be
provided
through
a
penthouse
eighth
edition
chapter
ten
means
of
egress
violation:
the
steer
head
room
obstructed
by
the
hatch
one,
zero,
zero.
B
Chapter
780,
chapter
10,
means
of
egress
violation
of
handrails
do
not
extend
and
terminate
as
required
at
ten
twelve
point.
Six
to
handrail
at
handrail
extensions
handrail
shall
return
to
a
wall
god
or
walking
surface
or
shall
be
continuous
to
the
handrail
of
an
adjacent
stiff
light
or
ramp
run
where
sterols
are
not
continuous
between
flights,
the
handles
will
extend
horizontally
at
least
12
inches
beyond
the
top
riser
means
of
egress
violation.
Due
to
the
hatch,
the
handrail
will
not
be
able
to
be
continuous,
even
if
added
to
comply
with
ten
12.6.
B
B
BV
Moran
Alpine
advisory
services
alpine
way
with
me
is
the
developer
of
loose
Lagoon.
Madam,
she
addressed
the
building
code
violations.
First,
mister
Pazhani
I've
submitted
a
copy
of
the
slides
of
the
Sullivan
Code
group
presentation
of
state
he's
building
code
edition
chapter
11,
dealing
with
historic
structures.
The.
F
BV
F
BV
Two
units,
if
two
units,
the
building
itself
measured
from
curb
at
grade,
is
two
three
and
a
half
stories.
It's
not
a
full
four
story.
Building
I've
submitted
photographs
of
similar
installations
by
this
developer,
the
stairway
is
continuous,
with
a
continuation
of
the
hatch.
The
hatch
does
open
swings
over.
AL
F
AW
BV
A
F
S
BV
The
appeal
is
for
a
conditional
use
permit
to
erect
to
the
rear
of
the
building
a
rear
deck
which
will
project
six
feet
supported
by
brackets.
I
have
support
letters
from
the
Rutland
Square
Association
support
letters
from
both
obedient
of
bodies.
There
was
a
community
meeting
organized
by
the
mayor's
office.
Those
in
attendance
were
demanded
ously
in
support
of
the
project.
He
is
a
known
developer,
having
developed
on
the
street
before,
and
he
received
the
endorsement
of
the
community.
A
BW
D
F
AK
BV
B
A
BX
Property
at
80,
Summer
Street,
is
a
5
unit
condominium
building
the
subject.
Property
is
unit
4,
comprising
the
fourth
floor
of
that
building.
The
applicant
proposes
to
convert
that
from
an
office
space
to
a
one-bedroom
residence
and
the
applicant
didn't
receive
a
refusal
letter
due
to
insufficient
useable,
open
space,
I'm.
BX
Thank
you
for
having
madam
chair.
It's
a
mixed-use
condominium.
Presently
there
are
three
commercial
units,
three
units
used
for
commercial
purposes
and
two
residential
units,
including
units
three
and
unit
five,
which
are
above
and
below
the
subject
property.
Here,
as
I
was
saying,
this
was
cited
for
insufficient
useable,
open
space.
Unfortunately,
there
is
no
open
space
on
this
property
which
could
be
used
by
the
occupant
of
this
unit.
The
building
comprises
the
entire
footprint
of
the
lot.
There
is
a
roof
deck,
but
it's
only
accessible
from
unit
five,
not
accessible
from
unit.
How.
A
BH
AZ
B
You
minute
calling
VOA
seven
two:
zero
zero,
seven
one
thirty
four
Gladstone
Street.
This
is
a
remodeling
existent
finished,
basement,
converting
from
one
family
to
a
two
family
and
remodel
the
kitchen
and
bathroom
violations.
Article
53,
section:
nine
insufficient,
open
space
per
unit;
name
an
address
for
the
record.
Please.
BY
And
members
of
war
and
Viviana
Gonzalez
viana
designer
for
this
project,
we
are
seeking
a
relief
for
insufficient
open
space
per
unit
we're
this
is
a
conversion
of
one
family
to
a
two
family
thousand.
Three
hundred
and
fourteen
square
feet,
43
years
queer
feet
that
are
available
for
open
space,
but
every.
BY
BY
D
BY
BY
BE
A
D
B
The
next
case
calling
VOA
seven
five,
five,
two
two
four
except
47
251
Webster
Street.
This
is
a
change
of
use
of
one
office
space
to
a
residential
unit
erected
before
my
occupancy
will
be
a
restaurant
and
bar
with
roof
deck
and
dining
yoga
studios
fitness
center
professional
uses
and
five
apartments.
No
new
sprinkler
work
or
revised
fire
alarm
layout
violations.
B
BP
Afternoon,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board
Richard
Lin's
1216
betting's
of
Street
East
Boston
on
behalf,
the
petitioner
with
me
is
Phil
Fratto
Rowley.
He
was
the
principal
of
the
entity
that
owns
the
property
and
operate
of
the
current
restaurant.
This
board
may
remember
that
back
in
March
of
2015,
this
board
granted
relief
to
change
the
occupancy
of
a
former
industrial
site
to
a
mixed-use
building
with
a
restaurant
yoga
studio
and
residential
mixed
juice.
Above
that
building
has
been
completed
and
is
operational.
BP
Part
of
the
proposal
originally
involved
using
a
portion
of
the
space
on
the
upper
level
for
dedicated
office
space,
yet
that
office
space
would
be
used
to
operate.
The
restaurant
to
serve
as
an
office
for
the
restaurant
based
upon
the
design
during
construction
was
determined
that
that
space
would
no
longer
be
necessary.
Mr.
BP
fryer
Olli
has
looked
at
the
possibility
of
continuing
to
use
that
for
rentable
office
space,
it's
not
necessarily
feasible
unless
you
are
operating
something
in
the
building,
it
doesn't
necessarily
set
up
very
well
to
operate
as
an
independent
office
space
for
a
third
party.
So
the
proposal
is
to
change
that
space
from
a
office
used
to
a
residential
use
would
be
a
studio
size
unit
about
555
feet.
We
did
have
the
opportunity
to
go
back
before
the
neighborhood
and
present
this
to
the
neighborhood
association
who
supported
it
wholeheartedly.
BP
BP
BP
J
BE
AJ
G
B
Calling
VOA
seven
three:
five
zero:
two
six,
four
thirty
eight
River
Street.
This
is
changing
the
occupancy
for
one
day,
care
center
and
body
are
Carla
in
unit
one,
no
signage
on
this
application,
no
work
to
be
done
other
than
painting
the
violations.
Article
60
section
40
parking
is
insufficient.
Article
60,
section
eight
Batiatus,
forbidden
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
my.
A
BZ
Everyone
forty
or
gave
me
support
to
open
up
a
tattoo
parlor
in
matter
penis
with.
A
AV
BZ
AJ
V
AL
A
A
B
You,
following
your
next
case,
calling
boa
seven
one:
five,
five,
two
five,
seven,
twenty
nine,
two,
seven
thirty-one
each
5th
Street.
This
is
to
renovate
an
existing
to
failing
and
add
a
third
floor
addition,
the
violations,
article
68
section
29,
whose
structure
restricted
district
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
CA
Boy
ma'am
is
before
my
name
is
James
Christopher,
with
the
business
address.
A
415
Neponset
have
RCA
LLC
with
the
project.
Architects.
CA
Excuse
me,
we
were
deferred
we
we're
proposing
to
renovate
existing
to
Finley
in
South
Boston
on
East
Fifth
Street
increased
living
space
in
the
basement
and
extend
the
living
space
to
a
new
penthouse
addition
we
deferred
at
the
last
hearing,
as
we
had
met
with
the
neighbors,
and
they
were
concerned
about
the
size
of
the
addition.
We
met
again
with
the
neighbors.
We
reduced
the
side
of
the
third
story,
penthouse
and
set
it
back
15
feet
from
the
front
of
the
building.
I
also
have
for
the
record
good
team
owners
to
support
from
abutters.
CA
CA
F
CB
Good
afternoon
my
name
is
Nicola
Fleur
I
live
at
723,
East,
Fifth
Street,
so
to
the
immediate
west
of
this
project.
I
had
opposed
the
original
presentation
that
he
made,
but
I'm
very
comfortable
with
the
modification
I
think
they're
very
thoughtful.
In
response
to
my
concerns
and
the
other
neighbor
concerns
I'm
comfortable
with
an
improvement.
Thank.
CC
BE
Madam
chair
members,
the
for
John
Allison
mayor's
office
of
neighborhood
services,
because
this
was
cited
within
article
68.
We
cannot
go
on
record
and
support.
However,
I
do
want
to
acknowledge
that
at
the
first
meeting
there
were
concerns
about
the
size
of
the
addition
proponents
set
it
back
15
feet
which
appeased
many
people,
they've
also
committed
to
removing
the
roof
deck,
which
addressed
almost
all
of
the
concerns
that
were
raised.
So
this
is
a
project
that
went
from
having
very
limited
to
support
and
now
having
a
fair
amount
of
support.
Thank
you.
BH
What
Paul
Sullivan
resident
council
as
Michael
Flaherty
article
68
with
the
Quinn
Thrun
extensive
community
process
and
the
council's
approach
has
been
consistent,
cannot
support
variances
wherever
there
are
times
these
variances
sought
may
be
considered.
It's
a
substantial
hide/show.
Therefore,
would
you
prefer
the
voice,
knowledge
and
wisdom
for
understanding
interpreting
zoning
laws
as
it
pertains
to
the
unnecessary
and
unintentional
projects?
Thank.
G
A
G
A
B
This
is
a
change
of
arts
from
a
three
family
dwelling
to
a
four
unit,
dwelling
renovate
direct,
the
vertical
addition
and
extend
living
space
in
the
basement.
An
upper
edition
with
deck
violation
thought
equal.
Fifty
three
Section,
eight
multi-family
is
forbidden
particle.
Fifty
three
section:
nine
lot
area
traditional
dwelling
unit
is
insufficient.
Fifty
three
side
Dada's
insufficient
article
53
it
FA
R,
is
excessive
article
53,
section
nine
open
spaces,
insufficient
article
53
building
height,
is
excessive
article
53
section.
BP
Chair
members
of
the
board,
Richard
Lin's
1216
medicine,
Street,
East
Boston,
on
behalf
of
the
petitioner
with
me,
Sara
Cooney,
the
property
owner,
a
few
housekeeping
items
to
eliminate
some
of
these
violations.
When
this
permit
was
originally
filed.
The
rejection
letter
indicated
that
this
was
only
a
three
family
dwelling.
We
had
a
number
of
conversations
with
the
inspectional
services
department,
I
provided
a
copy
of
the
certificate
abuse
in
occupancy,
showing
this
is
a
four
unit
dwelling
and
was
a
lawful
four
unit
dwelling
for
some
time
that
would
eliminate
madam
chair
for
the
record.
BP
A
BP
BP
J
D
J
BP
A
A
BP
Because
of
what
we're
proposing
with
respect
to
the
vertical
addition,
the
side
yard
would
still
remain
insufficient
because
we
are
within
the
two
and
a
half
foot
setback.
The
FA
are
being
excessive
because
of
the
extension
of
the
living
space.
The
building
height
would
be
excessive
because
of
the
pre-existing
condition
of
the
modification
that
we're
proposing.
The
number
of
storeys
is
a
question
mark.
A
BP
Want
to
make
one
modification
the
reason
we're
back
here
from
deferral.
Madam
chair,
we
did
have
an
opportunity
to
present
this
as
a
Jefferies
Point
Neighborhood
Association.
The
original
plan
I
believe
mr.
Pazhani
is
looking
at
was
supported
generally
by
the
community.
When
we
went
through
the
about
errs
process,
we
did
hear
a
number
of
concerns
relative
to
the
roof
profile
and
that
the
full
build-out
of
that
roof
was
somewhat
of
a
concern.
So
we
had
gone
back
and
modified.
BP
That
and
I
do
have
a
set
of
plans
which
I
can
provide
the
board
with
a
full
set
for
stamp
that
actually
sets
back
the
the
vertical
addition
and
squares
it
off.
I
know
there
isn't
a
butter
here
who
is
president
the
director
fodder
across
the
street,
who
had
a
specific
concern
about
height?
We've
made
a
commitment
to
not
exceed
the
height
of
the
top
of
that
building
presently
and
that
stands
at
39
feet
six
inches
and
we're
happy
to
include
that
as
a
proviso
as
well.
BP
A
D
BA
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
my
name
is
Robert
Marcellus
and
I
live
at
258,
Webster
Street,
that's
directly
across
the
street.
From
this
project
and
I
face
I
face
the
project.
The
the
original
complaint
was
the
height
of
the
building.
It
was
going
to
be
apparently
five
feet
higher
than
the
proposal
that
they
have
now
so
they've
scaled
back
their
proposal
so
that
the
building
is
only
as
high
as
the
peak
of
the
roof.
BA
My
few
high
my
third
floor
residence
looks
directly
out
and
there's
a
horizontal
line,
as
you
see
in
the
in
the
plans
there,
and
that
horizontal
line
is
above
the
other
buildings
next
to
it,
so
that
building
already
exceeds
the
I
guess
the
current
legal
height,
and
so
they
were
going
to
go
ten
feet
above
that
horizontal
line.
So
now,
apparently,
it's
just
about
five
feet
above
that
horizontal
line
to
the
peak
of
the
roof.
So
it's
a
view.
BA
A
B
You
following
your
next
case,
calling
BOA
seven
five,
four,
nine
nine
zero
one.
Twenty
four
Devon
Street.
This
is
parking
for
two
vehicles.
The
violations
article
10
section,
one
proposed
parking-
is
within
five
feet
of
the
side.
Lot
line
article
fifty
section
43,
the
proposed
tandem
parking
has
limited
maneuverability
an
article,
fifty
section.
Forty
three
dimensions
of
the
proposed
parking
space
is
insufficient
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please.
CD
A
CD
CD
Fernand
I
keep
for
car
last
year
for
Thanksgiving
it
was
my
daughter
was
in
France
the
driver
and
my
son
bring
the
car
and
because
there's
no
packing
space
and
the
night
juice
for
the
dinner,
because
it's
my
daughter
was
back
and
free
in
the
back
and
look.
But
if
it's
somebody
I
also
pack
I,
cannot
do
that.
This.
A
B
A
A
B
So
we're
gonna
go
back
to
case
bzc,
three,
three:
zero:
eight
to
twenty
seven,
seventeen
to
twenty
seven
nineteen
Washington
Street.
We
did
have
on
file
that
the
application
expired.
This
year
we
had
an
old
piece
of
paper
that
we
were
going
by,
but
counsel
found
the
new
letter.
So
we
denied
this
applicant
and
we
should
not
have
because
she
was
within
the
parameters.
So
whoever
made
the
motion
I
would
hope.
Could
we
send
their
motion
and
we
could
grant
this
woman
this
applicant
and
a
one-year
extension.
D
A
BA
Z
S
B
CE
Two
years,
so
the
this
board
in
August
of
2017
approved
on
this
parcel,
as
well
as
adjacent
parcels,
a
large
19th
storey,
building
that
approval
was
appealed,
and
while
that
appeal
is
pending,
my
client
is
seeking
to
continue
the
temporary
use
for
parking,
and
we
hope
it's
no
longer
than
two
years.
It
could
be
shorter.
If
the
appeal
is
resolved
before
then,.
CE
Expired,
yes,
so
the
parking
uses
fires.
So
what
happened
was
as
a
prior
owner
the
silliest
caught
some
sorry
I
cannot
pronounce
his
name
cut.
Some
Powell
Terrace
had
used
the
had
used
that
area
for
surface
parking
for
many
years,
I
think
dating
back
to
the
1960s.
He
came
to
the
board
in
October
in
December
2014,
for
permission
to
extend
that
use.
CE
A
CE
He
had
not
done
what
he
said.
He
was
going
to
do
with
respect
to
landscaping
or
maintaining
the
parking
lot,
so
this
board
denied
it.
He
then
appealed
it
since
that
time,
Stewart
acquisition,
22
LLC,
my
client-
has
bought
the
property
and
has
stepped
into
his
shoes
in
the
appeal.
My
client
seeks
to
do
the
things
that
the
prior
owner
wouldn't
do
to
maintain.
A
BL
Chair
we've
been
working
with
the
Bay
Village
neighborhood
association
to
refresh
that
list,
I'm
just
pulling
it
up.
So
forgive
me
for
looking
at
my
phone
and
this,
but
but
the
list
includes
a
number
of
items,
the
first
being
install
a
permanent
blockade
on
the
Shawmut
street
of
the
property,
so
cars
can't
pull
from
Stuart
Street
through
the
parking
lot
onto
shammed
Street
right
now,
there's
just
a
chain-link
fence
that
a
KRA
chain
that
occasionally
gets
taken
down,
which
we
are
fine
with.
BL
Secondly,
there's
old
dunnage
for
a
sign:
that's
no
longer
there
that
sits
on
top
of
the
roof
of
the
building
and
right
now
it's
just
a
rusted
frame
and
we've
agreed
to
remove
that
frame.
Isd
won't
give
us
the
requisite
permits
unless
we
have
approval
in
the
first
instance
from
this
board.
Furthermore,
one
of
the
changes
relates
to
maintaining
the
landscaping,
removing
rotted
landscape
barriers
and
and
buckets,
and
and
do
seasonal
plantings
to
do
weeding
to
do
graffiti
removal
and
file
the
necessary
certifications
with
the
city
of
Boston
to
allow
them.
BL
A
BL
So
it's
so
so
it's
it's
right
now,
there's
a
series
on
the
church
Street
Plaza,
which
is
the
western
side
of
the
property.
There
are
some
planters
on
the
south
side,
which
is
the
Shawmut
Street
property
which
have
planters
which
have
fallen
into
disrepair
and
decay,
and
we
would
be
replacing
those
that
are
there
today
with
the
plantings
and
forgive
me
amount.
You
may.
F
A
BL
F
BL
BL
A
A
CF
G
F
A
A
J
J
J
J
J
J
BL
G
A
part
of
me
that's,
and
maybe
it's
just
today
but
there's
a
part
of
me-
that's
a
little
bit
frustrated.
Okay,
because.
G
H
G
BA
A
CE
Did
respectfully,
my
client
did
try
to
get
a
permit
from
ISD
to
do
some
of
the
work
that
would
have
been
made.
It
look
nicer,
but
while
the
appeal
was
pending
in
court,
ISD
couldn't
couldn't
and
wouldn't
issue
a
permit
for
that,
so
they
have
tried
and
they
were
focusing
really
on
on
the
new
project,
because.
BL
L
A
Provide
us
the
respect
by
by
providing
an
updated
plan
that
actually
shows
what
your
intentions
are.
This
is
this
is
what
it
is,
but
show
us
something
that
actually
puts
in
the
public
screening
on
Charlotte.
Whatever
happens
on
church
there.
Should
we
eliminate
that
coach
come
on
Stuart.
We
know
this
is
considered
temporary,
but
in
the
meantime
you
can
in
fact
be
a
good
neighbor
to
the
city
of
boss,
and
all
of
us
will
walk
up
and
down
that
Street.
So
so
those
are
the
things.
B
J
G
BL
G
BL
Right,
so
this
reflects
the
20
spaces.
The
way
in
which
cars
are
parked
today
in
part
depends
on
the
type
of
cars
that
are
there.
So
the
the
way
which
is
now
is
it.
It
is
five
lanes
of
parking
that
it
is
tandem
parking.
So
therefore,
they're
moved
so
I
can't
speak
as
I'm,
not
the
day
to
day
parking
operator,
but
on
a
daily
basis.
BL
J
A
A
B
A
A
W
BR
CG
Head,
yes,
thank
you
so
much
so
I'm
trying
that's
my
goal
here,
because
we
had
a
Buddist
meeting
in
February
at
the
abundance
meeting.
The
owners
of
14
Thomas
poch
asked
that
they
could
have
a
curb
cut
foot,
so
they
could
park
there
too
cuz.
That
was
it.
That
was
their
only
request.
They
said
they
weren't
gonna
touch
the
deck
they
weren't
gonna
touch
of
the
stairs
they
needed
parking
for
just
there
to
cuss,
so
the
abut
is
and
the
that
were
at
the
meeting
had
a
lot
of
concerns
and
said.
CG
No,
we
don't
approve
of
this.
We
won
the
support
of
the
mayor's
office.
We
were
in
touch
with
build
any
hands
office
council
areas
office.
We
had
support
of
everyone.
We
the
abundance,
sent
lettuce
to
say
that
we
were
in
opposition
than
at
the
meeting
on
April
13th.
Testimony
was
given
by
the
attorney
from
14
Thomas
Park
mr.
Mahoney,
and
at
that
meeting
mr.
Mahoney
stated
mr.
Bhalla
mother
with
ALS.
He
who
does
not
live
in
Boston
I
will
be
moving
in
part-time.
The
abutters
never
heard
that
at
the
February
meeting.
CG
CG
CG
CG
A
CG
Also
ask
that
the
variances
would
remain
to
be
upheld
and
that's
a
tangible
thing
that
we
were
asking
for
and
that
we
had
support
from
City
Hall.
We
had
all
this
support
and
at
the
meeting
in
April
you
were
told
that
the
rear
had
ad
grade
access
to
the
house.
It
does
not
have
at
grade
access.
It
goes
into
the
sub-basement.
CG
CG
Visitor
parking
that
was
I
visitor
parking
area.
We
lost
that
when
he
put
the
driveway
it
and
you
know
we
lost
parking
visit
crosswalk
at
the
corner.
We
lost
where
the
driveway
is
plus
the
curb
cut.
So
while
they
gained
two
spots,
we
lost
two
spots.
Okay
from
that,
so
it
wasn't.
It
even
exchanged.
Okay,.
CF
A
CF
The
safety
concern
there's
a
lot
of
traffic,
both
pedestrian
and
vehicle
traffic.
In
that
area,
the
the
driveway
is
not
far
from
the
curb
the
from
Thomas
Park
onto
Pacific
Street.
It's
a
quick
turn.
There's
a
lot
of
traffic.
Now,
there's
buses
that
go
down
there
and
there's
a
national
park.
That's
up
at
the
hill,
so
there's
a
lot
more
foot
traffic
and
vehicle
traffic
as
well
as
industry
vehicles.
CF
Our
house
at
13,
Pacific
Street,
was
actually
hit
by
a
car
years
ago
that
chance
of
it
getting
hit
again
is
has
increased
I'm
concerned
because
that
when
they
back
when
they
go
in
or
back
out
of
their
driveway
people
are
there's
going
to
be
more
people
at
risk.
I
feel
more
at
risk
being
in
our
inner
home,
I'm
sure.
There's
no
intention
of
increasing
the
risk
of
people
and
vehicles
around
but
I'm
sure
I
hope
not,
but
there
is
an
increase
of
an
accident
where
a
pedestrian
getting
hurt.
CG
To
me,
I
had
I'm
sorry,
also
at
the
April
meeting
they
said
there
were
76
director
buddies
that
were
in
approval
when
I
went
to
flairies
office
to
get
the
copies
of
all
the
abutters
44,
the
abutters
I
non-direct
and
the
20
some-odd.
That
word
I
direct
about
is
one
was
a
high
school
student
who
lives
with
his
parents,
and
the
other
ones
were
under
the
impression
that
mr.
Barlow's
father
would
be
moving
in
so
out
of
sympathy.
CG
They
agreed
with
him,
but
we
never
knew
that
the
director
butters
never
knew
that
and
the
people
that
signed
were
not
at
the
meeting
in
February
when
it
was
never
said
that
he
needed
it
for
a
hardship.
He
never
mentioned
a
hardship
at
all
and
that
would
have
been
the
time,
but
he
should
have
mentioned
that
hardship
at
the
February
about
his
meeting.
He
had
ample
opportunity.
All
she
said
was
he
wants
parking
for
his
cuz,
which
I
cannot
blame
him.
I
would
love
parking
also
it's
extremely
tight.
CG
BR
BR
H
BR
There
are
two
mechanisms
under
the
code
or
more
appropriately,
the
enabling
act
for
being
an
appellant
or
petitioner
for
this.
This
board,
that
is
section
8
of
the
Enabling
Act
section
11
of
the
Enabling
Act
section
8-
is
why
most
matters
I'm,
sorry
section
11
is
why
most
matters
have
before
this
board.
BR
That's
the
mechanism
whereby
a
person
denied
a
building
permit
for
the
reason
of
the
Native
American
or
a
conditional
use
permit
appeals
a
decision
of
ISD
to
deny
a
permit
application
section
8,
which
we
typically
see
here
as
in
force
as
interpretation
hearings,
is
actually
more
properly
understood
as
the
enforcement
mechanism
of
the
Enabling
Act,
which
gives
anybody
who's
agreed
by
any
active
decision
of
the
building.
Commissioner,
the
right
to
appeal
such
an
active
decision
of
the
Building
Commissioner
to
this
board
within
45
days.
BR
What
we
have
here
essentially,
is
honestly
a
reading
discussion
of
a
matter
that
was
decided
by
this
board
on
April
25th.
If
this
were
to
be
properly
appealed,
the
decision
of
the
board
would
have
had
to
have
been
appealed
to
the
Superior
Court.
That's
not
the
case.
We're
seeing
a
number
of
these
self.
BR
A
number
of
these
self-titled
citizens
appeals
most
falling
outside
the
statutory
appeal
period,
for
the
decision
being
complained
of
that
account
is
bored
and
they
are
failing
to
meet
the
requirements.
The
administration
requirements
of
article
5,
section
2
of
the
code,
which
states
that
any
appeal
to
this
board
must
clearly
state
the
section
of
the
code
which
the
hearing
is
is
the
subject
of.
We
have
not
heard
anything
that
is
the
special
services
department
in
any
way
erred
in
issuing
apartment.
This
matter
was
brought
on
appeal
to
this
board.
BR
BR
A
BR
A
BR
A
AH
BR
Was
misrepresented
at
a
community
meeting
that
somebody
was
moving
in
who
had
a
disability
and
that
wasn't
in
fact
the
case
that
wasn't
even
mentioned
at
the
end
public
hearing,
because,
frankly,
my
my
colleague
attorney
Mahoney
did
not
feel
it
was
appropriate
to
reveal
personal
medical
information
about
our
clients.
Mother.
A
A
A
A
A
B
Okay,
I'm
gonna.
Do
the
zoning
Advisory
subcommittee
meeting
on
October
26
to
2017
case
boa.
Seventy
five,
eight
four,
seven
one
six.
Eighty
nine
Saratoga
was
approved
with
BPD
a
to
construct
a
new
dormer
in
addition
extend
living
space
to
the
Attic,
an
existing
single-family
residential
case,
boa
seven,
five,
six
five,
three
three
ten
school
Street
was
approved
with
BPD
a
construct,
an
outdoor
deck
in
rear
of
the
building
and
roof
exterior
stay
as
an
existing
single-family
residential
case
boa
seven,
four:
four:
seven:
four:
nine
two.
B
Eighty
two
to
284
Cambridge
Street
was
approved
change
of
ARCA
to
the
juice
bar
cafe.
Interior
renovation
accommodated
news
juice.
Ba
no
more
than
25%
of
the
business
would
be
eating
case,
BOA,
seven,
six,
two
three
six,
two,
forty
four
Gate
Street
was
postponed
case,
BOA,
seven,
four,
zero.
Three,
two:
four
to
thirty.
Five
to
two
thirty
nine
Dudley
Street
was
approved
with
the
proviso
for
takeover
Dudley.
That
was
the
name
of
the
couple
name
of
the
shop
case,
boa
seven,
five,
four,
nine
nine
zero
was
heard
today
case.
B
Boa
76227
was
deferred
today
case
BOA
75217
923
grasmere
was
approved
with
BPD
a
to
construct
a
second-floor
addition
when
roof
deck
on
existing
first
floor
master
bedroom
with
master
bath
he's
boa
seven.
Five:
three
seven:
three
zero
twelve
25
to
29
River
Street,
was
approved
with
VPP
at
BPD,
a
the
provider
was
no
more
than
19
in
the
school
case
boa.
This
was
a
change.
Why
fairy
tale
hair
salon
estate,
real
estate
and
retail
offers
from
professionals
Cole
case
BOA?
B
Thank
You
mr.
mazzani,
the
next
case,
boa
seven,
five,
six,
eight
six
223
burette
was
approved
with
BPD
a
to
construct
a
new
dormer
second
level
on
existing
dwelling
and
expand
living
space.
On
the
second
floor,
K's
boa
seven,
six,
three:
zero
on
to
40
coins
dinner
owed
was
deferred
to
twelve
nineteen
2017
at
eleven
thirty
case,
boa
a
seventy
three
three
five
three
one
full
world
street
was
approved.
This
was
to
extend
living
space
to
the
basement
and
attic
space.