Can you advance the slides? Good evening. The city of Boston zoning board of appeal hearing for January 22, 2026 is now in session. This hearing is being conducted in accordance with the applicable provisions of the open meeting law, including the updated provisions enacted by the legislature
this year. The new law allows the board to continue its practice of holding virtual hearings through June 2027. The this hearing of the board is being held remotely via the Zoom webinar event platform. This hearing is also being recorded. In order to ensure this hearing, the
board is open to the public. Members of the public may access this hearing through telephone and video conferencing. The information for connecting to this hearing is listed on today's hearing agenda, which is posted on the public notices page of the city's website, boston.gov. Members of the public will enter the virtual hearing as
attendees, which means you will not see yourself on the screen, and you will be muted throughout unless administratively unmuted when asked to comment. Board members, applicants, and their attorneys or representatives will participate in the hearing as panelists, and they will appear alongside the presentation
materials when speaking. Panelists are strongly encouraged to keep video on while presenting to the board. As with our in-person meetings, comments and support will be followed by comments in opposition. The order of comments is as follows: elected officials,
representatives of elected officials, and members of the public. The chair may limit the number of people called upon to offer comment and the time for commenting as time constraints require. For that reason, the board prefers to hear from members of the public who are most impacted by that is those
individuals who live closest to the project. If you wish to comment on an appeal, please click the raise hand button along the bottom of your screen in the Zoom webinar platform. Click it again and your hand should go down. When the host sees your hand, you will receive a request to unmute yourself. Select yes
and you should be able to talk. If you are connected to the hearing by telephone, please press star 9 to raise and lower your hand. You must press star six to unmute yourself after you receive the request from the host. Those called upon to comment will be asked to state their name and address first and then
can provide their comment. In the interest of time and to ensure that you have enough time to do so, please raise your hand as soon as Mr. Stebridge reads the address into the record. Do not raise your hand before the relevant address is called or the meeting host will not know to call on
you at the appropriate time. We ask that you keep your comments brief and all public testimony will be limited to one minute per person. Speaker, um Mr. Stembridge, >> good evening, Madam Chair. Present.
>> Good evening, Mr. Bernell. >> Good evening, Madam Chair. Present. >> Good evening. Floor is yours, Mr. Stebridge. Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, we will begin with the hearing is scheduled for 5:00 pm for today.
First, we have case BOA 1 1802 07 with the address of 301 to 305 West Broadway. If the applicants andor their representative present, will they please explain the case to the board?
>> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Stembridge. Madam Chair, members of the board, attorney Ryan Spitz with Adams and Morancey, business address of 168th Street, First Floor, South Boston. Uh, joining me today is the applicant, Don Nune, as well as the project architect, Doug Stefangh. The proposal here is to add an
eyebrow beauty spa with microlading in a vacate in a vacant commercial space. There'll be no change to any of the other occupancies. Although the main address is 301 through 305 West Broadway, the proposal is for the secondary address of 247D Street. The
beauty shop isn't allowed use within the MFRLS subdist, but the micro blading treatment is considered a forbidden use, which requires the relief. This type of service is consistent to a few other locations on the on the West Broadway side as well as East Broadway. Lastly,
we have a violation for insufficient parking as the code requires two spaces for this type of use. again uh consistent with many other commercial uses on West Broadway that do not offer any parking. Uh at this point, Madam Chair, I'm going to turn it over to you and the board for any questions or comments.
>> Thank you. Are there any questions from the board? Hearing none. May I have public testimony? >> Good evening, Madame Chair and members. Sigy Johnson with the Office of Neighborhood Services. This applicant has completed the community process. Our office oversaw distribution of anformational flyer to each occupied
structure in a 300 ft radius which solicited no comments to our office. The city side neighborhood association chose to take no position on this proposal. That background our office defers judgment to the board. Thank you. >> Thank you >> madame chair. There are no additional comments.
>> Will that may I have a motion? >> Motion to approve. Motion to approve. >> I have a second. Second, >> Mr. Sbridge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Bernell, >> yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you all. >> Next, we have case BOA 178475 with the address of 2 Pacific Street. The applicant andor their representative present. Would they please explain to
the case of the board? >> Yes. Hi, uh Brian Kaplan for Two Pacific Street. Uh Two Pacific is a single family in South Boston. It was in really bad shape with water damage and multiple areas, structural issues, a hoarding situation. I've brought it back to life.
It's remaining a single family. I'm looking to add a roof deck to it. The site's a constrained site. Lot size is 1,173 square ft. Uh with such a small lot, there's limited outdoor space.
The proposed roof deck is approximately 10 by 16, plus the roof hatch and walkway stairs area. For setbacks, the left side is set back 5 in. The front is set back 5T 8 and 1/2
in. And the back is set back 7T 5 in. And the front and back's actually even a little further when you consider the the dormerred windows. Uh access again would be through a roof hatch. Um precedent, there's a lot of precedent in the neighborhood including a number on
Pacific Street, I believe 14, 8, 12, and 16 Pacific Street all have roof decks as well as 491 and 495 East 4th which are very close to this building. Uh we went through the community process and I've talked with some of the
neighbors outside of that. You know, there was some uh a couple people had concerns about noise. Uh I think as a single family private deck that this situation doesn't warrant the same concerns as a roof deck on a rental
building or even a condo. Uh this building is not designed for a group of young people. It's designed for a family. Uh, another concern was some privacy from a rear of butter. Uh, to help address this, we set the roof uh, back
the most from the rear of the building. Again, 7' 5 in. Uh, and I additionally, I don't think this deck creates, you know, a new privacy issue there. You know, it's being in the city, it's a dense area with buildings very close to each other.
There's similar sight lines from the top windows of my building, the top windows of the neighboring building, the roof deck next door. Uh, additionally, two of the rear neighbors who, you know, opposed some objection to the roof deck had also requested that I not, you know,
remove or notably trim the large magnolia tree in my backyard because it helps with privacy and noise. I obliged on that and and was happy to do so. It's a beautiful tree, but the tree does take away from my backyard space and certainly the sunlight there. So, I
thought the roof deck was a kind of a reasonable tradeoff. The purpose of this deck is to give a family some outdoor space for fresh air and sunlight, make this home work better for a family, help the tight site be more livable, you know, and hopefully
all that will encourage people to to live here instead of, you know, move into the suburbs for more space, let them invest in the neighborhood and and not move out. So, based on all this, I think the roof deck here is a sensible option. Thank you for your time and welcome. Any questions?
So, just to confirm, there is a roof deck adjacent to your property. Is that correct? I'm just looking at Google Earth. >> Yes. At uh 4 Pacific. Yes. >> Okay. And so, like, so there is a buffer. You're there's going to be a setback between decks obviously.
>> Uh they're very close to each other. You know, the way the stairs work uh in both buildings, they're kind of right next to each other. >> Okay. Other questions from the board? >> Um yes, Madam Chair. Um, so it's a single family and you'll be living
there. >> I will not. It's for sale. >> Oh, it's for sale. Okay. >> It's for sale. >> But but it's a single family at this point. >> Yes. Correct. >> All right. Thank >> any other questions from the board. >> I have public testimony.
>> Madam Chair and members, Ziggy Johnson with the Office of Neighborhood Services. This applicant has completed the community process. Our office hosted an abutterss meeting on November 6, 2025 at which direct Abutters were opposed to the proposal. Four individuals spoke in opposition to the proposal citing negative quality of life issues with
other roof decks in the area. Our offices received five letters of opposition from within the abuters radius. Same concerns which have been forwarded to the board. The applicant met with the Dorchester Heights neighborhood association which also expressed those concerns but did not provide a formal position on this proposal. That background, our office
defers judgment to the board. Thank you. Thank you, >> Madame Chair. There are no additional comments. >> Okay. With that, may I have a motion, >> Madam Chair? I'm going to make a motion of approval. >> Is there a second? >> Second.
>> Mr. Sbridge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Renault? >> Yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. >> Thank you. Next we have case BOA
1696173 with the address of 4843 Washington Street. The applicants and or their representative are present. Would they please explain to the board? Um,
the person with the number that ends in 29, I'm not sure if looking to speak for this case. You are you're allowed to mute yourself. Now >> once again the person with the number
5085301129 not sure if you're looking to speak for for this case. >> I'm representing 4843 Washington Street. My name is Orian from Struga Construction and uh we are going pretty much proposing the demolition and
rebuilding of F60 dormer. The the it's a two family. the third floor. We're trying to use it for, you know, like a do like a like a for the additional additional stuff like
this. So, put some more stuff on it and uh we were trying to fix it last year, but it was in a very bad condition and we thought, you know what, let's do it right and go a little bit higher according to the plans
we proposed. Are there questions from the board? >> Well, just trying to understand what you're trying to do. So, so there is an existing dormer that you're trying to take that you will be taking down and rebuilding. Is that >> Yes. Yes.
>> And as you're rebuilding the the the dormer shape and uh is it's getting a little bit bigger. Is that correct? >> It's going a little bit higher. Not. the same the same measurements and everything but little bit higher actually in the entrance where the
stairs are it's very narrow. So that's this is the purpose of that. The first one was because it was a very bad condition. We wanted to fix it and the second is that one. So, we said, you know what? Just ask the city if they
gave us a permit to to to go a little bit higher and make it work for everybody. >> Does that answer your question for now? >> Yep. >> Okay. Uh, may we have public testimony? >> Madam Chair and members, Sigy Johnson
with the Office of Neighborhood Services. This applicant has completed the community process. Our office oversaw distribution of anformational flyer to a butters in a 300t radius which solicited no comments to our office. The applicants met with the West Roxbury neighborhood council which is supporting this application. That
background our office defers judgment to the board. Thank you. >> Thank you madame chair. We have somebody from in the attendee section. The person with the number again 29 if you can mute
yourself. >> Is that person trying to speak? Can you tell >> what was the qu what was the question? We didn't hear it. >> I'm sorry. I'm speaking to Jesus. Is was the person is there a person who's trying to speak? >> Is that's what I'm trying to figure out
because >> the hands raise but uh it's not muted to I don't know >> is the person >> is there someone speaking ending in the
phone number 1129. >> I I'm it says I'm unmuted. You guys don't hear me? >> I hear you now. Are you speaking in support or opposition of this project? >> I'm speaking I'm trying to speak in opposition of the two Pacific roof
project for some reason. >> Okay. Right. >> That that unfortunately has already been presented and uh voted on. So we're we're on 4843 Washington. Okay. So there are no so no other raised
hands for this project. Uh with that may I have a motion? >> Madam chair would like to make a motion to approve. >> May I have a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Seambridge >> yes.
>> Mr. Bernell. >> Yes. >> Pair votes yes. The motion carries. Good luck and thank you to everyone. Think >> that's Good evening, Madam Chair. Good evening.
>> All right. Have a good night, everyone. >> Thank you. Good evening.