--------- Roll call again. Mr. Stebridge >> present. Madam chair. >> Thank you. Mr. Valencia. >> Mr. Langam. >> Present. Madam Chair. >> And Mr. Renell. >> Present. Madam Chair. >> All right. The floor is yours. Mr.
Stebridge. S. Excuse me. Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, next we'll be going to a court remand hearing scheduled for 12 p.m. This is case BOA135
9438 with the address of 22 Handover Street. If the applicants and or their representative are present, would they please explain the case to the board? Yes. May I speak?
>> Yes, please. >> Okay. My name is Park McDow. I am the architect for this project. Um, I'll advise you when to advance the slides, but if you could start on the first page, please, that would be helpful. Uh, as was stated, we are here today for a remand hearing at the direction of the
Suffach Superior Court. And to provide a little background in 2022 this project was approved by community groups uh by the board of appeals by the ISD by PIA. Uh subsequently and a butter appealed
this board's decision granting zoning relief and recently the Suffach Superior Court denied that plaintiff's request for summary judgement but it did ask the DOA to review its decision specifically regarding rooftop structures. So on
behalf of my client, I respectfully ask this board to affirm their previous decision as our process was appropriate and consistent with all governing regulations. If you go to the second slide, please. Yeah, the timeline. Wonderful. So this
project timeline, it validates the BOA's previous approval 21. We followed the required process for seeking zoning relief. The mayor's office notified all neighbors about the project. We secured the support of both community advisory groups, that's New Ra and Newick. The
BOA then approved our petition for zoning relief with the pro required BPDA design review of the rooftop and the head house and screen. Uh, and this is important because the court specifically asked the BOA to confirm that these
rooftop features have been reviewed thoughtfully. This is why we are here today and they have been reviewed thoughtfully. Uh after several months of design review, the BPDA asked us to remove a six-foot privacy fence that we had in our original proposal. We did that and the BPDA approved the design,
including all rooftop features. Next slide, please. The subsequent slide shows the BPDA approved design documents. Note the existing condition of the building shown in the left, which already features a roof, deck, and head house. The very
things that are up for discussion today. Uh, I have got other slides that indicate the overall project, but at this time I'm happy to relinquish the floor and answer any questions the board may have. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Are there questions from the board?
>> What were the um I understand what the judge is asking for. Um, what were the objections that were raised um in trying to get us to this point? Um the abuter objected to everything about the project uh including
pre-existing conditions over which we have no control and which aren't under the purview of any of the decision makers here today. So a boilerplate um rejection of the project from a a an abuter who has a a track record of of uh
filing many lawsuits. >> That answer your question, Mrs. Numbbridge? >> Yes, it did. Sure. >> Okay. Are there any other questions from the board? >> Yeah, I have one quick question. I just like to know why did the butter object
to this project? >> Um it's a little bit difficult for me to speak without to that without without addressing the character of the abuter. Um I I think the the most general way to say it is the abuter owns
a deceased. So, it's his estate which is carrying on this this lawsuit. They own many different properties and file many different lawsuits. Um, we were the recipient of this particular one. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> All right. Any other questions?
>> Um, I'm sure we just asking questions or making comments as well. >> Well, eventually we're getting to a motion, but you can Yes. questions and or comments. >> Thank you. It's not a question. I'm just I I was looking at the site plan and the documents and also the location on on
Google. I am familiar with the street. I see that there are several similar structures in the area, different roof rooftop structures. There is not a lot of open space like in the area for
families. And I don't see how this uh change to the property or this addition is going to risk pedestrian safety or increase any traffic um mobility or increase traffic at all. And I'm just
trying to understand what are the motives from the person who is oing the project. >> I don't think we're here to question other people's motives. We're just here to >> We're just here to focus on what the applicant uh is requesting. >> Okay. Thank you, Madam Chair.
>> Okay. All right. Caroline, is public testimony required for this? >> I would take public testimony. Yes. >> Okay. Anything else from the applicant before we do so?
>> No. My statement is complete. Thank you. >> Okay. Uh, may I may I have a public testimony? >> If there is, I'm not sure if they're open, but >> I don't see anyone fores, but then >> we can go with Robert
>> Hopkins. I'm an attorney who represents the auterate issue. >> Okay. Briefly, 90 seconds. >> Of course. So, uh, my client owns the property at 374 376 North Street located directly behind the property that's
being permitted. The reason we objected and continue to object is because the project contemplates a twostory addition to a one-story portion of the project of the property. which addition is going to cut off a lot of light and air which
through our patio which is located directly behind the project. So we continue to oppose this project is detrimental to my client's property uh particularly the decreased privacy increased shadowing massing and scale. We appealed the prior decision to the
superior court. Uh that is now on appeal to the appeals court. Um the portion of the variance that the judge we believe incorrectly said wasn't needed. Um and now we're here on remand for the conditional use permit portion of the project which we asked that the court
did not. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Any other raised hands? >> Uh I I'd like to speak to that if I could. after we go through any other public testimony. >> I don't see any other hands raised.
>> All right. Thank you. So, please the applicant. >> I just want to clarify that the issue that Robert Hopkins cited is not the issue up for debate today. The judge ruled that that was something that we could do by right. That is the two-story
extension. It is not something we have to decide today. You're directed as the zoning board of appeals by the SuffK Superior Court to to consider the rooftop structures. >> Thank you. >> All right. Any other questions on that aspect
from the board hearing? None. Is there a motion? >> Or Madam Chair, also if the board has any comments as well, this is also the time or they have any follow-up questions. Of course.
>> Well, just to continue my previous comment, I think this the structure is appropriate for the area. This is a very dense area that has similar structures. You can see that just on Google Maps. So, I think this is a this this project
is a good fit for the the building. I don't see any challenges about this >> and I would like to second Mr. Valencia's comment. You know, look, you know, knowing the area and u, you know,
just uh noting that there is, you know, it's a multifamily dense area of the city. I think this is pretty much in line with what we would want to see. >> Okay, I'll go back to is there a motion? Um there's a I'll make a motion of
approval. Um basically to go along what others said um the roof deck is intended for typical residential use um in this area. Um and I don't see it why it wouldn't be allowed. So I'll make a
motion of approval on the on that basis. >> Okay. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Stebridge. >> Yes, >> Mr. Valencia. >> Yes, >> Mr. Langum.
Did we lose Mr. Langum? >> Yeah. Yes. Yes. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Bernell. >> Yes. >> Chair chair votes yes. The motion carries. Good luck. >> Thank you each very much for your time.
Okay. So, the last item on the agenda is the adoption of proposed rules um and regulations. I'm not sure if Mr. Ste is supposed to read that in or >> I'll do that, Madam Chair. >> Okay. There was a long awkward pause, so just checking.
No, it was wrong. Um, next on the agenda we have, uh, we'll discuss adoption of proposed rules and regulations, Madam Chair. >> Okay. Uh, has everyone had an opportunity to review the proposed rules
and regulations? >> Yes. >> Excellent. Any any questions or concerns? >> No, no qu no concerns. just um comment that we have to we should follow and
review those regulations and make in the future make appointments for positions that are still vacant. >> Thank you. Noted. Any other comments or questions? May I have a motion? >> A motion out to approve the rules and
regulations. Thank you. May I have a second? >> Mr. Stebridge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia? >> Yes. >> Mr. Lang? >> Yes. >> Mr. Bernell?
>> Yes. >> The chair votes yes. The motion carries. >> All right. I think that's it. Is that it for today? Are we >> anything else? >> All right. There's nothing else on the list.
>> All right. Excellent. Well, thank you very much. Have a great day, everyone. >> Have a great day. >> You, too. >> Bye. Part: 2
Good morning of Boston zoning board of appeal hearing for June 2nd 2026 is now in session. This hearing is being conductance with 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. This hearing of the board is being remotely via the Zoom or event platform and is also being livereamed. No sure this hearing of the board is open to the public. Members of the
public may access this hearing through tellation for connecting to this hearing listed on today's hearing agenda which is posted on the public's page of the city's website boston.gov. Members of the public will enter the virtual hearing as attendees which you
will not see yourself on screen and you will be muted throughout unless adminly unmuted when asked to comment. Board members, applicants and their attorney representatives will participate in the hearing as panelists. 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. The order of comments is as follows. Elected officials, representatives of electeds, and members of public may limit the number of people called upon to offer comment and the
time for commenting as time conspire. For that reason, the board prefers to hear from members of the public who are most impacted by a project. 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
on the bottom 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 and lower your
hand. You must press star six to unmute yourself after you receive the request from the host. You 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 vote,
please raise and sit is the address into the record. Do not raise your hand before the address is called or the meeting host will not go to call on you at the appropriate time. We ask that you keep your comments brief and all public testimony will be limited to 90 seconds.
>> Okay. Uh Mr. Hembridge. >> Good morning, Madam Chair. Present. >> Good morning, Mr. Bia. >> Good morning, Madam Chair. Present. >> Good morning, Mr. Lome. Good morning
madam chair present. >> Good morning Mr. Bernell. >> Good morning ma madam chair present. >> Good morning. So we are a five member board. Uh with that I will turn it over
to Mr. Sim. >> Uh what happened now? >> Thank you Madam Chair. We'll begin today's hearings with the approval of hearing minutes scheduled for 9:30 a.m. These minutes are from May 14th and May
19th of this year. I'll make a motion uh that approve. >> I have a second. >> Second, >> you broke up there, Madam Chair. Oh, sorry. Mr. Stebridge. >> Yes.
>> Mr. >> Yes. >> Mr. Lang. >> Yes. >> Mr. Bernell. >> Yes. >> Chair. The motion carries. Next, we have the extensions scheduled for 9:30 a.m. I'll read all the
extensions in one after the other if we have any questions. Um, after that can direct those to Madam Chair and then we'll go from there. We begin with case BOA56709
with the address of 13 Alexander Street. Next we have case BOA 1436577 with the address of 110 to 118 Terrace Street. Next we have case BOA 1435582
with the address of 110 to 118 Terror Street. Next we have case BOA577058 with the address of two 2-10 Hitchborn Street. And finally for the extension we have case BOA129
91 09 with the address of 252 to 252A Shaman Avenue and those are the extensions for us today. >> Thank you. Any questions from the board?
Have a motion to grant the extensions of >> motion to grant. >> Second. Second. >> Mr. Ste. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia. >> Yes. >> Mr. Langum.
>> Yes. >> Mr. Bernell. >> Yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carried. Next, we'll move on to the hearing scheduled for 9:30 a.m. At this time, we'll ask if there are any
requests for withdrawals or deferrals. >> M. Yes, Mr. Stbridge. >> Uh, yes, attorney. >> Yes. Um, the address is 841-847 Morton Street. >> Yeah. So that so this request goes for
case BOA183 9863 with the address of 841 to 847 Morton Street. Would you go ahead and explain attorney Small? >> Sure. So good morning Madam Chair, members of the board. Attorney Derek Small have a business address of 51
Doppson Road. Uh we're today seeking a deferral of the case for 841-847 Morton Street. um the advertisements and the notices went out incorrectly. So, it does has to be readvertised as well as a uh NPC notice of project
change has to be filed with the planning department. >> Okay. Uh Caroline, any dates? So, for this one, um, if the board could just, uh, move to defer it, um, and then
we'll schedule a date at a later time, please. >> Okay. Uh, may I have a motion to defer? >> Motion to defer to a later date. >> May I have a second? >> Second, >> Mr. Stebridge? >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia?
>> Yes. >> Mr. Langham? >> Yes. >> Mr. Bernell? Yes. Chair votes yes. The motion carries. >> Thank you very much. Have a good day. >> Next request for deferral. Withdrawal of deferral.
>> Mr. Three more. Three more street. Please. Did I have my hand up before Mr. Spitz? >> Bear with me for >> uh so this I'm sorry. It says three more. Correct. >> So this is for case BOA
1837592 with the address of 3 more street. Would you go ahead and explain to everyone? >> Yep. Thank you. Good morning madam chair, members of the board. Richard Lynn's business address of 245 Summer Street, East Boston on behalf of the petitioner requesting a deferral. I
believe you have five member board today. We would like full board for that hearing. >> Okay. Do we have dates, Caroline, or do you want to wait? >> We could we could do July 14th, July 28th, or August 11th.
>> Uh, why don't we do July 28th? >> Okay, with that, may I have a motion? >> Motion to grant a deferral to July 28th. >> Ma'am, second. >> Second. >> Mr. Stanbridge. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Valencia? >> Yes. >> Mr. Langum? Yes, >> Mr. Bernell. >> Yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. >> Thank you. >> And which case do you have your hand up
for attorney Smith? >> 163 Hillside Drive. Please, Mr. Stone. So this would so this request is for case BOA 1814618 with the address of 163 to 165 Hillside
Street. Um go ahead attorney Spitz. >> Great. Thank you Mr. Stebridge. Madam Chair, members of the board, Attorney Ryan Spitz, Adam Morancey, business address of 1688 Street First South Boston. Um we are looking just for a short deferral uh to allow the plans
examiner a little bit more time to review the revised items that were announced. >> Okay. Uh >> and then for this one um we can do June 16th. >> That's perfect. Great. Thank you. >> Okay. Can I have a motion?
>> Motion to defer until June 16th. >> Can I have a second? Second. >> Mr. Steambridge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia. >> Yes. >> Mr. Langum. >> Mr. Langum. Are you with us?
>> I think we've lost Mr. Langum. Are you there, Mr. Langum? >> I see him, but Oh, he disappeared. Okay. I don't know if Caroline or if somebody can also ping him. I'm sure he's trying to jump back on. Bear with us. We are a five member board, so we
need we need him. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Bernell. >> My pile is shut down. >> Let's hope that was truly temporary. >> Okay. Where Mr. Renell. >> Yes.
>> Okay. The chair votes yes. The motion carries. We'll see you then. >> Thank you. >> Any further request? I do have a note on something, Madam Chair, but I'll ask if there are any further requests for withdrawals and deferrals. Uh do have a note for another one.
Should we just continue and then do that when we get to it or >> uh you you tell me Caroline what should we do? Um, we can just do it now at the top of it.
>> Then this would be for this request would be for case BOA 183514 with the address of 176 L Street. And the note that I h I see here, Madam Chair, is that uh it will it will be
deferred to June 16th at 11:30 a.m. >> Okay. Uh with that, may I have a motion to defer? >> Motion to defer this case till June 16th. >> Second, >> Mr. Stebridge.
>> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia. >> Yes. >> Mr. Lam >> yes. >> Mr. Bernell >> yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. So with that,
turn to the cases scheduled for the hearing scheduled for 9:30 a.m. We'll begin with case BOA 182 4653 with the address of one Westminster
Terrace. If the applicant andor their representative are present, will they please explain the case to the board? >> Hello, good morning. My name is Rachel Fabish. I live at one Westminster Terrace. Um we are trying to hoping to
finish our basement. The basement was existing and built at the time that the house was built. Um we are not looking to expand the footprint or raise the ceiling. It's just to turn an unfinished empty space into something livable for our family. We hope to include a
playroom, a guest room for our family when they come from out of town to visit, um a bathroom, and a hobby shop like a a hobby space for our family. And um that is what we are seeking to do. >> Thank you. Are there any questions from
the board? Hearing none, may I have public testimony. >> Good morning, Madame Chair and members. Sigy Johnson with the Office of Neighborhood Services. This applicant completed the community process. Our office oversaw distribution of anformational flyer to all occupied parcels in a 300 ft radius which
solicited one letter of support to our office. The Brighton Austin Improvement Association is supporting this application. With that background, ONS defers judgment to the board. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Next, we have Ben. >> Hi, good morning. I am the Fabish's next
door neighbor. I'm so close that we share a party wall. I am wholeheartedly in support of this. I I think that finishing atticss and basement should be by right without having to bother the ZBA. Thank you.
>> Thanks. Next we have Annabella Gomez. >> Madame Chair, members of the board, Annabella Gomes from the Brighton Nelson App Improvement Association. The Brighton Nelson Association voted to support this. Uh we are very happy supporting families staying in the neighborhood. Thank you.
>> Madam Chair, there are no additional comments. >> You are mute. Madam Chair, >> sorry. Didn't want you to hear me coughing. Uh with that, may I have a motion? >> Motion to approve. I >> have a second. Second. Second.
>> Mr. Tambridge. >> Yes. Mr. Vonsia, >> yes. >> Mr. Lam, >> yes. >> Mr. Bernell, >> yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. Good luck.
>> Thank you very much. >> Next, we have case BOA 182552 with the address of 5 to 7 Aldi Street. If the applicant and or the representative are present, would they please explain the case to the board? >> Hi, I'm Robert Fusyan
and you could see we wanted to convert a two family to a three family house and also we want to to uh request of additional parking space uh in the property. This does not expand the footprint. You know, we just wanted to
uh separate the the uh third floor into another unit because it has all the elements going for it in terms of staircase up and down from front and back and uh and you can see from the picture
and also so that's about it though. And it basically involves uh uh enlarging the bathroom you know from the on the third floor to to to uh to the to measurement of uh 40
roughly 40 square ft. Uh 40 square ft eight times. Yeah. 40 square ft. Right now it's it's small. If you look at the uh the uh yeah if you look at the third floor it's very small and you can see
the one below which is expanded. So basically proposal from two to three family and to to add additional u parking spaces two parking spaces. >> Thank you.
>> Okay. >> Any questions from the board? >> Yeah I have one small question. Where would the palin be exactly located? >> It's on the side of the house. You can see from the the third page. Yeah, that that page you can see the first two and
then we have we I want to extend to to the next uh ahead of it. >> So basically the park parking spaces are already there and you're just adding two more. >> We're just adding one more spaces. Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. Any other questions from the board?
May I have public testimony? Madame Chair and board members, Sigi Johnson with the Office of Neighborhood Services. This applicant completed the community process. Our office hosted an abutters meeting on March 26 where no comments were made. The applicant has met with the Alston Civic Association and they have sent a letter of support
to the board. With that background, ONS defers judgment to the board. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Next, we have an Anthony iso. >> Good morning, Madame Chair, members of the board. Tony Doddoro representing the
Austin Civic Association. Uh the proponent appeared before us with a a very reasonable and appropriate floor plan and design in keeping with the surrounding community. uh we only ask
that no building code relief uh be granted and that uh hopefully they refrain from renting to undergraduate students but the ACA is in support of this proposal. >> Thank you.
>> All right. Uh don't see additional hands raised for comments, Madam Chair. >> Okay. With that, may I have a motion? >> Motion to approve. There a second. >> Second. >> Mr. Stebridge?
>> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia? >> Yes. >> Mr. Lang? >> Yes. >> Mr. Renell? >> Yes. >> Chair votes? Yes. The motion carries. Good luck. >> Thank you.
Next we have case BOA 1838237 with the address of 393 Cambridge Street. This is an article 80 case and if the applicant and or their representative would uh explain to the board please.
>> Yes. Thank you Mr. Stanbridgeidge. Good morning madam chair, members of the board. My name is George Morancey. I'm an attorney with the business address of 350 West Broadway in South Boston. I represent the petitioner, 393 Cambridge Street, Nominee Trust, whose principles
are Fred Starkov, Steve Whan, and Josh Federman. Joining me today is Jacob Simmons representing the owners and developers, and Tanya Carrier of Kalsa Design, the project architect, who will walk the board through the plans once I conclude my summary and address the
requested zoning relief. This is a proposal to construct a seven-story hotel with 96 guest rooms at 393 Cambridge Street in the Boston Landing section of Alustin. The project site is
an approximately 8,220 square foot parcel at the corner of Cambridge Street and Wilton Street in Alustin. It is currently occupied by a singlestory advanced auto parts store with prominent surface parking. what the
uh BBDA itself describes in its board memorandum as an unattractive commercial site. The project will replace that service parking lot in Low's retail structure with a productive transitoriented hotel that will activate
this important segment of Cambridge Street. The site is directly adjacent to two parcels uh 8 Wilton Street and 415 Cambridge Street that together form the approved Alston Square project which is
a sevenstory mixeduse development of rental housing and commercial space uh that was approved in 2021. The scale and massing of this hotel is fully consistent with what the city has already endorsed in the immediate surrounding parcels. what is being
proposed at 393 Cambridge Street is a building that fits the trajectory the city itself has set for this corridor. The site is also within the area of the 2021 Alolston Brighton mobility plan with Cambridge Street being identified
as the future AB transit corridor connecting uh Oak Square, Brighton and Union Square. The u the planning board's memorandum notes that this section of Cambridge Street is a key neighborhood connector and active edge and that
transit oriented development of this character is consistent with city planning goals for the district. Uh the site is zoned CC1 community commercial. Uh and on January 15th of this year, the BBDA board voted to unanimously approve
the project. With respect to zoning relief, the hotel use is conditional in the Harvard Avenue CC1 community commercial subdist. Uh and um the code itself thus anticipates by not making this a a forbidden use but rather a
conditional use that hotels can in fact be appropriate in this district under the right circumstances. And we certainly believe that to be the case here. this location on Cambridge Street with its transit connections, proximity
to Boston Landing and the uh the evolving Boston Landing development area uh as well as the dense mixeduse character of the surrounding approved projects provides an appropriate setting for a hotel use which we think is u is
very much needed here. With respect to the dimensional relief being requested, the CC-1 zoning subdist imposes a maximum uh and somewhat uh unreasonable in hindsight F of 1.0 and a maximum building height of 35 ft. Being proposed
here is an F of 5.68 and a height of 93 ft as well as no proposed rear yard setback against a 20ft minimum required by code. I would note that the uh BBDA board's planning memorandum
or board memorandum provides the planning rationale uh for these variances uh with the Boston planning department staff explicitly acknowledging that the proposed dimensions while not aligned with existing zoning are in fact reflective
of the evolving context of the neighborhood and the activation of >> the Cambridge Street section of the uh the CC1 subdist. Thus, the base uh dimensional standards of article 51 uh I think the conclusion is and not
really calibrated to what this corridor has become and is becoming since this zoning was originally enacted. The 35 ft height limit in F1 belong to as I say a prior generation of planning assumptions for Cambridge Street in this location.
The adjacent Alolston Square project which was approved by the city as I say in 2021 is also seven stories. Uh the Brighton guest street area planning study which frames the planning vision for this stretch of Cambridge Street calls for transit oriented mixeduse
development of uh of precisely this character and density. As to the rear yard, obeying a 20 foot rear yard setback here on a total parcel that is approximately 8,220 square feet would be a direct um severe and and and sight
specific hardship. It would effectively preclude any meaningful development of this lot. a rear yard of 20 ft. And this parcel size is inconsistent with urban commercial context in which the site is located and would be inconsistent with
the pattern of uh immediately surrounding parcels and other development in the in the uh in the neighborhood. Uh there's uh relief required for off- streetet parking. The code requires 67 off- streetet parking spaces for a hotel
of this size. Uh what is being proposed here is four drop off spaces. Uh this is not um a failure to provide necessary parking. This was a conscious decision. It's a deliberate planning consistent and BTD endorsed decision not to
construct automobile infrastructure in a transit serve urban location. Cambridge Street will carry u the future Alstead Barton transit corridor. The site is approximate to multiple MBTA bus routes and to Boston landed commuter
rail station. Uh the BBA the planning department's review endorsed this approach and BTD has been engaged throughout the design process. The project will provide bicycle storage for 18 bikes for employees and guests and five exterior public bicycle parking
spaces consistent with the 2021 bike parking guidelines. hotel guests um arriving in this location, it's predicted, would be overwhelmingly arriving by tra transit, um ride hailing, apps, um ride share, taxis,
etc., not in privately owned motor vehicles requiring long-term storage. So constructing a 67c car garage on the site uh wouldn't be feasible and would be fundamentally contrary to the transit oriented nature of this project which will be primarily serving people or
almost exclusively serving people uh from outside of Boston. Um there are numerous community benefits associated with the project. If a board member requests me to recite them, I will. But I don't want to prolong my testimony before turning it over to Tanya Carrier
to walk the board board briefly uh through the plans. So at that time, unless there's any uh question uh immediately on something I just said, I propose to turn the presentation over to Tanya who will, as I say, take the board briefly through the plan set.
>> Thank you. Yes, briefly, please. >> Great. Thank you. Tanya Carrier from Culsa Design. Uh the project aims to significantly improve the streetscape along both Cambridge Street and Wilton Street. Currently there is over 100 ft of curve. >> So can you move us through slides so
that we can see detail that you're talking about? >> I don't have access to that but whoever is controlling the slides. >> Well you need to tell them where to go. >> Oh okay sure. Next slide please. Um this is our existing condition site
plan. Um, as I was mentioning, the project site has currently over 100 feet of curb cut along Cambridge Street with front yard parking and over 30 feet of curb cut on Wilton Street. >> So, basically, >> our project aims to in to close that
existing curb cut fully on Camber Street, providing a better pedestrian experience, and enclose all but a single uh 10-ft driveway on Wilton Street, uh, providing access to our valet drop off parking area. our proposed site plan. Um our front
step setback we've aligned with the adjacent uh proposed development um and working closely with the BPDA on developing that. Next slide. Our landscape plan. Um as I mentioned, we propose to improve the streetscape by
adding um a pedestrian walk uh sidewalk. We also have four street trees proposed where there currently none. A frontage area um with with visitor bike parking, seating, benches, and additional
landscaping features. Next, >> we don't need you to go through every slide, but can you focus on the slides? That would be helpful. >> Sure. If you can go down to the the floor plan. Keep going. One or one more. So, here is our
proposed floor plans. We have 96 total rooms proposed, a mix of king suites, double suites, um, and and double full rooms. The ground floor is all lobby area with our parking in the rear, including some bike parking for
employees. And to our exterior slides, about slide 13. Keep going. >> Keep going. So for our exterior design, uh we've worked closely with the BPDA Butters and other um neighborhood groups to develop
something that fits in with the proposed and existing developments. Um seven stories tall, 93 ft. We've stepped back the top floor and provided a um generous storefront area at the ground floor for an interactive experience.
And I'll leave it at that. >> Okay. Questions from the board. >> Hearing none. May I have public test? >> Yes. Actually, I have a question for attorney and I I'm looking about around the block
and there are two other projects that you mentioned that were approved before like 2021. Is your team or the development team also engaged in those projects or or are those two different developers? Uh it is still the um uh the current uh
current team for that. They are still working on financing like many projects in the city. Uh it's an approved project that my clients are trying to get underway and they've been um um they're in preconstruction planning right now, but it is the same development team and
they do intend to complete those approved projects. >> Thank you. So they went approved in 2021, right? >> That is correct. So if approved this this hotel what what will be the timeline for developing for actually building this building since the other
project has been waiting for many years. >> Uh it's an excellent question which uh obviously I don't have the answer to. I mean for a project like this uh just to get to building uh permit issuance after a ZBA hearing
is typically a minimum of uh 12 months. uh and then it would be u a matter of getting construction financing in line and I think everybody is hoping that certainly within the next year or after the next uh year that uh conditions will
be improving both in terms of uh uh finance market and uh and u you know construction material pricing so hopefully it's something that could commence uh sometime in 2027. >> Thank you to Morazzi. I was just thinking about that since the developer
uh development team is the same if they are going to pri prioritize the project in terms of getting the finance in place or if they are going to try to do both at the same time. Another question is do you have to provide linkage fund linkage contributions?
>> No, there's no there's no linkage Mr. Valencia. This is an article 80 small project, but uh there are a lot of major streetscape improvements to Cambridge Street and Wilton Street that are being required, including sidewalk widening, new street trees, uh planting beds, uh
new uh street lighting, uh public seating. Uh there's going to be a $30,000 contribution to the city's fund for parks. There's going to be a new uh raised uh high visibility ladder crosswalk at the Wilton Street, Cambridge Street intersection. uh
closing of the curb cuts that are currently fronting on Cambridge Street which will improve pedestrian continuity. Um so there are a number of uh of benefits that are being provided but not formally under what is known as linkage under article 80. >> All right. Thank you.
>> No more question. >> Any other questions from the board? >> May I have public testimony? >> Yes, madam chair, members of the board. Coner Newman with the mayor's office of neighborhood services. At this time, the mayor's office to defer to the judgement of this board some background
information this community process. Um, this was overseen by Boston planning, which I'm sure they'll be able to elaborate further on. Uh, it involved a public meeting that was held uh in September of 2025. Uh, there were concerns uh which were also echoed by the Austin Civic Association about the
lack of parking being provided. concerns contributed to um congestion for this particular node of uh the corridor that connects uh Alustin all the way over to um Oak Square in Brighton. Um with a number of projects coming online in the
Boston landing area as well as the um Great Scott project, uh they were worried that um there was not adequate uh off- streetet parking which would lead to just a buildup of people doing pickup and drop off and double parking on campus street. Um, I believe you
should have a letter from the Al Civic Association um, expressing those concerns but deferring to the board ultimately. With that information, we'll defer to this board. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Next, we have Anthony Duro. >> Yes. Good morning, Madam Chair, members
of the board. Tony Dadoro representing the Alston Civic Association. As ONS has just expressed, the Al Civic Association will defer a judgment to the board on this project. Uh there is still a lot of concern and confusion regarding the
direction the city is taking in projects like this in the community of Austin. As you know, the Boston Landing Hotel project is currently under construction and they have they will be providing up to 45 parking spaces and 3,000 square ft
of loading space. It's a project directly adjacent to the Boston Landing Commuter Rail Station and MBTA bus routes. So, that's a little confusing. Uh and and like I say, there are still wellfounded concerns regarding
circulation in the area, the impact on available on street parking for residents and small business, adjoining projects with little or no parking, traffic and congestion, uh assessing accessing the Massachusetts Turnpike,
and a lack of specificricity of mitigation of are they going to provide off off-campus parking. So, we're going to defer judgment to the board. Um, and and I also want to express the um the board brought up the
Austin Square project. That's that's another project that has been granted numerous concessions in order to get the shovels into the ground, including reducing parking significantly and eliminating condominiums. Uh the city
has been very generous in granting those concessions. I have to be honest with you. The response from attorney Morancey uh was a bit disappointing. This community has been waiting a long long time for the development of Alustin
Square, which is uh all graffiti and and really a negative impact on our community. Uh so uh it's it's unfortunate uh what that project has been going through as well. But again, the community sees very a lot of inconsistency
allowing uh Boston Landing 34 parking spaces right next to the commuter rail station. And yet this one here is in a a a transitoriented corridor for some reason that qualifies for no parking when we have a number of projects around
there in the pipeline with either no parking or very little parking. So we are going to defer judgment to the board. >> Thank you. >> Next we have Soy. >> Morning madam chair, members of the board. My name is Zoe Dval. I'm a
project manager in the development review division of the planning department here to express planning department support the project. Um filling in for the previous project manager on this project. Um this project filed their small project review application with us as an article 80 small project. On August 11, 2025, the
planning department hosted a virtual public meeting on September 30th, 2025, and then the project was approved by the BPDA board on January 15, 2026. Um, we're happy to see the project move forward and progress to the design review phase of article 80 um for
continued evaluation and we defer to this board for further action. >> Mr. can you speak a little bit more to the parking issue that was raised and just how you came to your decisions? >> Um, unfortunately, Madam Chair, I was
not the project manager on this project. I'm filling in for the previous project manager, but I'm happy to take it back to the team and try to get some more information on this. I was just not part of the review process. So, I unfortunately cannot speak to that. >> Thank you. >> Next, we have minor Perez.
>> Thank you, Jesus. Madame chair, members of the board, this is minor representing the carpenters union. Would we like to go on record and strong support of the project? >> Madame chair, there are no additional comments. >> Thank you.
Any other questions from the board? Any additional response from the applicant? >> Uh yes, Madam Chair. Uh just on the issue of the parking uh again being a hotel project it is not projected that this is going to be um a use that is
going to generate a lot of um need for parking. Uh people will be certainly arriving uh by both public transportation and motor vehicle uh typically as I said uh by ride hailing services to the hotel with very little need for on-site parking. Uh
anecdotally, I think most people who come to Boston don't believe that it's a good idea to uh you know rent the motor vehicle while they're here or drive here from uh another state anticipating that there's going to be parking. In fact, with the hotel that is not providing on
street, I'm sorry, on-site parking that would disincentivize anybody bringing a motor vehicle here. So, with the four essential ballet uh uh drop off spaces that the hotel will be providing, we're confident that the use wouldn't contribute to exacerbating any on street
parking conditions. >> Thank you, >> Madam Chair. I have another a follow-up question for attorney. Okay. >> Do you have a or your team I'm not sure if you have a sense of what would be the cost for every parking space that you
are providing for the loading parking spaces that are underground if I understand. What is the average cost for every parking space for this project? If you have that number handy, you mean to to create a garage to create every parking space? What would be the cost?
Uh I'm going to ask Jacob Simmons who was here, but uh uh in terms of what the the cost per space would be for excavation, uh there would need to be a ramp down. The site is just over 8,000 square ft. So it' be very little parking that I
think would be able to be provided on site. Uh the cost would uh you know probably be um um it would be very harmful I think to development course the cost of the project. I don't know what a parking space is is costing these days in terms of an underground garage.
Uh Jacob, do you have any information you can share on that? >> Uh good morning. Uh Jacob Simmons, City Realy Group. I in this particular project, it's harder to quantify because it's such a small uh maneuvering area. So I, you know, it would be in the
hundreds of thousands of dollars per space is. >> Thank you. was thinking about you trying to figure it out the financing for both projects and how much money you will have to add to a project to the financing if you want to create additional parking. Thank you. That was just for my own information.
>> Certainly. >> Okay. With that, may I have a motion? Mam share. I think this project is going to create several hundreds of jobs for Boston residents and I really hope that in combination with this project that
they have next door they can build as soon as possible and create jobs and housing. So with that I make a motion of approval. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Stebridge. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Valencia. >> Yes. Mr. Langham, >> yes. >> Mr. Bernell, >> yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. Goodbye. >> Thank you.
>> Next, we have case BOA 1760086 with the address of 57 to 59 Riverdale Street. If the applicants andor their representative are present, will they please explain to the board?
>> Hey, good morning, uh, Madame Chair, members of the board. My name is Timothy Burke. I'm the architect for the project. I have a business address of 142 Berkeley Street in Boston, and I'm representing the owner, uh, John Bannon, who was also on the call. Um, John has
owned this property for several years. He uh takes care of his properties very well and um rents them only to graduates or young professionals and um you know is very aware of being a good neighbor.
The uh existing building has three units and the proposal since the site is almost twice the size of the minimum for this neighborhood. The uh proposal is to add three two-bedroom onebath units on the rear of the existing building. And
uh as part of that, we're taking advantage of um creating a new stair to make the egress better for the uh the original uh kind of back stair that's there now. And also we would be adding a sprinkler system to um for every for the
entire building to improve safety. We did uh during the community process um there were two neighbors on Raymond Street. If we could back up one slide please to the site plan. Um the Raymond Street is at the bottom of that sheet. Uh actually one back to the
illustrative. Thank you. And so um we agreed to uh add some fencing and landscaping along the space between the properties and also to do the driveway in a permeable paver. So it will be more like a patio kind of look. Uh there are
six parking spots in this area and also the um the addition is to the north of the uh neighbors. So, we will not be casting any shadows or or blocking their light in any way. So, we feel that the um additional units are much needed in
the neighborhood and a a great use of the property and um think this is a great uh project for the neighborhood. And I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> Uh can you talk about the green space
that uh will be eliminated to expand? Yes, we are uh short on open space, but there will still be a decentsized uh rear yard and a and about the equivalent of what's existing for the main house on the sideyard. So, there are u some
decent amount of green space there. And we also feel with the permeable pavers, you know, that that area would be could be used for recreation by the residents as a it'll look a lot nicer than uh being a black top. Thank you. Other questions from the
board? May I have public testimony? >> Madame chair and members of the board. Sigy Johnson at the office of neighborhood services. This applicant underwent the community process. Our office hosted an abutters meeting on September 29th, 2025 where to direct Abutters were opposed to the proposal
citing loss of open space, the proximity of the rear parking area to the lot line and recent ongoing construction, excessive construction in the area. Our office received two letters of opposition that were forwarded to the board. The applicant met with the Alustin Civic Association where there were similar concerns raised, but the
applicant worked with that group to make some revisions to their plans, including to the setbacks and their president will also testify in more detail as to their position. With that background, ONS defers judgment to the board. Thank you.
>> Next, we have Anthony Didoro. >> Good morning, Madam Chair, members of the board. returning to the door representing the Alustin Civic Association. The Alustin Civic Association would like to go on record in support. The proponents appeared before us on three separate occasions.
the last one being the owner of the property. And uh John did a great job of addressing all the key concerns that direct Butters uh had and was uh very
interested in making whatever changes uh that were required in order to achieve that. Again, we we're asking that no building code relief uh be granted. Uh if a sprinkler system is required, we
would uh obviously be supportive of that. And again, we hope that as was expressed that uh he will not rent out to undergraduate uh students. So, uh we want to go in record in support. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. There are no
additional comments. Okay. Um, >> I had one more question. Sorry for for the architect. Um, so the units in the back, how are they going to how do you access those units if I'm a pedestrian walking in and trying to access those
units? >> The uh stair tower that is on the side of the house. Um, it sort of breaks up the massing so it doesn't seem like one long run. So that the back units would be a single exit uh via the sprinkler system.
>> So as a so I'm walking through the this uh so I'm looking at the site plan and what it seems is that um residents in the back would actually be walking through this driveway essentially. So the driveway serving a two two purposes. Is that correct?
>> That is correct. Yes. And that another reason to use the permeable pavers there. Okay. Any other questions? Okay. With that, we have a motion.
I'd like to make a motion to approve uh with a provisor to to have design review by uh the the uh planning department uh for site. Yeah. To review this the site design. Uh
um this you have decide to sign. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Stembridge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencio. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Langum. >> Yes. >> Mr. Bernell. >> Yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. >> Thank you very very much. Next we have case BOA 1839746
with the address of 80 garden street. This is an article 80 case and if the applicant andor their representative will please explain to the board. >> Thank you Mr. Sebridgeidge and good morning madam chair members of the board. My name is Johanna Schneider with
the law firm of Hemway and Barnes business address 75 State Street. I'm here on behalf of the applicant. With me are Dennis Greenwood from SUS of Design, the project architect, and Robert Allen, the owner's representative. We are here today to seek approval of an infill
residential project at 80 Gardner Street in Alustin. The site, which is approximately 25,500 ft, is currently developed with a an existing 28 unit residential apartment building. The new building, which is six stories at approximately 39,642
ft, will be constructed on what is currently an asphalt parking lot, um, and will replace an accessory garage structure. The new building will have 36 units with the following unit mix. One studio unit, three one-bedroom units, 16 two-bedroom units, and 16 three-bedroom
units. Six of the units will be incomerestricted in in accordance with article 79 of the code and that will include three-bedroom units. The existing site has eight uh vehicular parking spaces which will remain and an additional 18 new parking spaces are
proposed. Combining the existing and new development, there will be a total of 64 residential rental units and 26 parking spaces at the site. We will be providing 38 long-term bicycle parking spaces in an interior bike room um on the ground
level with direct access to the exterior and eight short-term bike spaces. In support of the city's green building and carbon neutral goals, the building will be all electric. I think one of the things that our team is most proud of with this project are the significant upgrades to the site. Under existing
conditions, there's only around 2500 square ft of open space on the site. The project will provide approximately 3,100 square ft of new residential amenity open space and approximately 1,500 square ft of private patio open space for 14 of the units. The project will
also provide significant landscape and vegetation including several new trees, permeable pavers along with a courtyard between the existing and new building and a small entry plaza and seating for residents. The project will also provide significant public realm improvements,
including closing an existing curve cut in front of the project site, granting a pedestrian easement to the city for a portion of the parcel that currently serves as a public sidewalk along Gardener Street. Already, installing one new street tree on Gardener Street, and we will be making a financial
contribution to the city's fund for parks intended to support Ringer Park. The BPDA board unanimously approved the project under small project review in October of 2025. In their approval memo, the BPDA board noted in particular that the project site is located within easy
walking distance to nearby public transit and retail. It is less than half a mile from numerous bus lines and the MBTA Green Line and the MBTA commuter rail is just over a mile from the site. The BPA board also found that the project aligns well with the area's
existing use mix. As I hope you can tell from the presentation slides before you, our team has really taken care to design a building that is consistent with its surroundings both in terms of scale and character. And we think it's a really unique project and that it manages to
add much neededed housing without displacement of existing residential tenants and businesses. With that, I am happy to turn this over to Dennis Greenwood, our project architect, to walk through the plans or we are on hand to respond to any questions that the board may have.
>> Are there questions from the board? >> Hearing none, may I have public testimony? >> Yes, madam chair, members of the board, caller Newman with the mayor's office of neighborhood services. This time the mayor's office like to defer to the judge from this board some back information on the community process. Uh
this been through a Boston planning led community process involving uh public meetings as well as engagement with the civic associations in this area. Um the public meeting was had uh in July of 2025. Uh I know residents were pleased
that there would be no displacements of current uh tenants. Uh they went on to meet with the Austin Civic Association as well as the uh the Brighton Austin Improvement Association. vote for supportive of this proposal. With that, I'll defer to the board. Thank you.
>> Next, we have Anthony Didono. >> Yes. Good morning, Madam Chair, members of the board. Tony to the door representing the Austin Civic Association. We'd like to go in record in support. As as standard, we uh would appreciate that there's no building code
relief granted. And given the challenges of the Gardner, Asheford, Pratt Street area with the high concentration of students and the challenges especially to law enforcement, we ask uh very strongly in this case that uh the
proponent refrain from renting to undergraduate students, but we do support the project. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Next, we have So D. >> Yes. Good morning, Madame Chair and members of the board. Zoe Dval again
with the planning department. Um, here to express express planning department supported this project as well. Um, the project filed their small project review application with us as an article 8 small project on June 27, 2025. The planning department hosted a virtual public meeting on July 23rd, 2025 and
the proponent also conducted an independent community outreach as well. As Mr. Newman noted the project was approved by the BPDA board on October 16th, 2025. We're happy to see this project move forward and progress to the design review phase of article 80 and we
defer to this board for further action. >> Thank you. >> Next we have minor pes. >> Thank you Jesus. Madame chair members of the board minor within would like to call on record and support. >> Thank you. >> There are no additional comments. Okay.
Any questions from the board? Any additional comments from the applicant? May I have a motion? >> Should I make a motion of approval? >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Stanbridge.
>> Mr. Valencia? >> Yes. >> Mr. Lang? Yes, >> Mr. Bernell. >> Yes, >> chair votes. Yes. The motion carries. Good luck. >> Thank you very much. >> Next, we have two article 80 cases
brought to us by the mayor's office of housing. These are companion cases and the first one is case BO826929 with the address of 11 Bufort. Along with that we have case BOA1826939
with the address of 434 Jamaica Way. If the applicants again are they representative or present, would they please explain these cases to the board? >> Madame chair, members of the board, my name is Jeremy Vieiraa, director of real estate development for Roger
Communities. We are a nonprofit focused on senior housing uh with a 160 year history in the Boston area. Um I want to introduce my uh legal counsel, Joe uh Lieberman Liber, sorry. uh he is uh and
dot Joyce from dot Joyce communications along with our architect Dilla Schaefer um and representing them is Phipe SA. Uh with that I'll hand it over to Joe. Joe. >> Uh madam chair, members of the board, Joseph Lever from Klein Hornig LLP with
the business address of 101 Arch Street in Boston. Um would you please turn to the page called existing conditions plan should be the next page. Yeah. So this is the um the Rogers house which
which many of you may know on on the Jamaica way with with the big uh uh setback from with that big front lawn off the Jamaica way. Um it is a uh building with 66 beds of memory care and a social day program. the the proposal
is to uh create a new building behind the existing building and and eventually to um undertake a phase two on the site of the existing building, but that's not uh before the board now. That's still in the in the planning stages. Um this
particular uh project will involve um the subdivision and consolidation of the parcel to create two legal parcels. Um if you go to the next page uh we could show that
next page please. Yeah. Okay. So um uh lot one in the rear will be the site of the new project which we're calling uh for these purposes Roger Bowfort. Um lot two in the front will be the existing
Roger house. Um the site had been is 139500 and or so square ft. Um the new lot in the rear will be 47,000 and change and the existing lot will become 92,000 and change because of the
uh subdivision. There will be some relief needed for the existing project as well which will um you know be on a on a smaller and and reconfigured parcel. Um I should say the artic the project we've
gone through article 80 approval. I meant to say that at the outset. Um and um parking and loading was determined through the article 8 process. It will be a 35ace garage under the new proposed building
um as have approved by the BPDA. The relief we need for the new building are additional lot area insufficient um floor area ratio excessive, building height excessive. Um in in addition to two uh uh use
elements um congregate living facility is conditional and daycare center for elderly is forbidden. The new project will consist of 41 affordable units, uh, 100% affordable units, um, uh, which
don't exist at the site now, separate apartments, um, a memory care facility and a social day program. Um, yeah, I think that about sums it up. If there are any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. Otherwise, I would turn it
over uh to Doc Choice to speak next. Can you talk about uh how how loading and unloading is happening now both of like supplies but also you know people uh vans whatever you're using and how how
that would change with this addition. >> Yeah definitely I think that Philippe Sod the architect who's going to speak after Joyce would would be better positioned to address that and I would say I'm sure he has a lot to say about it. >> Yeah. Quickly, we just wanted to let you know that we went through the
significant community process starting in 2024. Um, Roger has been a member of this community for decades and wanted to go out early. We did a lot of informal meetings. um filed our article 80, then engaged in a formal process, received
150 pieces of feedback over the course of the year, incorporated that feedback through meetings with our elected officials and uh representative of the planning department and came back with a significantly changed um project that has been approved uh by the BPDA board.
Um, and we have received some letters of um, non- opposition from our community, the Jamaica Pond Associ Association and the Jamaica uh, Plane Neighborhood Council zoning committee um, as well as our elected elected officials. Um, with that, I'll I'll turn it over to Phipe so you guys can see how this comes to life,
but it has been significantly changed to fit more of the fabric of the community. Um, density, height, parking, deliveries, all of the things that you can expect um, to bring more beauty to the space. >> Feet. >> Yes. Thank you. Good. Good morning
everyone. If we can go to slide number four or five. I don't see the the thing on the left hand side please. My name is Philip Sad. I'm the architect for Roger House. I'm a principal at the M Schaefer and my office is at 24 Farnsworth in the
C4 in Boston. >> And someone opened back up the file. >> I don't know if that's Jesus or someone else. Can you open it back? >> Thank you.
So if we can jump to slide number six. Thank you. I appreciate that. So this is the current condition. the existing memory care uh is what Joe has mentioned um is is aged and is very hard to renovate and hence the need to build a
new replacement building and then add 41 units of assisted living on top of it. And if we go to slide number seven, you'll get a sense of the the context itself. The building or the site is bordered by the Forest Building, a sevenstory building. There's the Bowford
Road condominium to the south, three-story buildings, and then uh single and two family homes around the locks that I have in Jamaican court. Uh could we go to slide number eight? Thank you.
So the overall plan uh will will will materialize in in this way. The the red house on the left hand side is the Roger house itself that will be maintained and renovated. However, Madame Chair, what's in front of us today is the six-story building on the right hand side. The
shorter building attached to the Roger House is what will become phase two later on and it's still in the very very early stages of planning. Uh so the the new building on the right hand side of the site is in two tiers. There's a
fourstory portion that borders um overgrowth and there's a six-story portion that is re re that recedes behind um the the lower portion of the building to accommodate the additional 41 units of affordable housing. If we go
next because this is a to slide number nine because this is a replacement project. So we have to build first phase one to move the memory care residents from the existing memory care into the new build and then continue later on
with the completion of the site as phase two. If we can go to next is a landscape plan showing how the the whole site will be um rellandscaped. There is a street front along Bford Road. There will be a pedestrian
entrance along this road right there at the center of the building. However, to answer your question, Madam Chair, the drop off and the pickup will happen just like it is right now off Buffford Road and along that circle um where it says
permeable pavers. This will be re-engineered and repaved to really accommodate um the new design of the site. The access to the parking which is below the building labeled phase one will be on the right hand side of the building right next to the setbacks
between our buildings and the forms. There will be a ramp that takes you uh half half a level below grade for a full 35 parking spaces below the phase 1 building. The sidewalk would be landscaped, has been reviewed by the Boston BCDC's,
trees and permeable pavement again and bicycle uh racks for uh building residents. There's also an internal bike storage inside the building for the building residents and the staff. If we can go to the next slide,
we've worked very much with the neighborhood and the BPDA and the BCDC to really create an exterior appearance of the building that really sits well in the masonry fabric of Jamaica plane, echoes the building across the street from it and really uh creates that low
height density streetscape along Ber Road. And then set back behind the masonry building is the additional two stories where the affordable housing uh unit will will happen. If we go to the next slide, this is a section through the site again
to explain how the building that is labeled a sixtory will not appear as a sixtory from Bford Road and will be receding towards the fourstory masonry volume. Next, some angles. Because this is a memory care facility, daylight and outdoor
access is crucially important. So, this building has many outdoor courtyards uh that are secure for the residents so they can be outside uh unattended as needed for their dignity and uh freedom uh as well as their safety.
Next, these are renderings from Bowford Road. And um looking back at the building, you can see the four-story buildings appear along Bford Road. It has this scalloped facade that echoes the building across from it and uh an archway at the front
at the first floor that also signifies the archways uh that are across the street from it. What we some of us call the stoops of the Boston historic architecture. Next, that's another view from the other angle. The Forbes building is uh right
at the edge of the image on the right hand side and the Bford work condominiums are the one on the left hand side and our building is right in the center. If we go to the next, it's a close-up view of the building entrance,
the landscaped uh front of the building and uh the the treeine streetscape that will be planted uh to continue the treeine uh from the bow from from the Forbes building all the way up to the Jamaica way. And the last image is a
view back from the Jamaica way. If we go to the next slide. Thank you. This is the Roger house on the left hand side built in 1957 that will be maintained and renovated. And then phase two which sits quietly behind it and what's in front of you today is
phase one um towards the rear. Uh this magnolia tree is currently existing and will be the center of that uh surface parking lot for uh visitors. And with this I conclude my presentation. Thank you. Thank you. So just a question. Um so
currently all all vehicular access is from Bowfort. There's none from the Jamaica way. >> No, there's none. >> And none contemplated? >> No. >> Other questions from the board? >> Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. I first of
all a comment. I appreciate the creation of the of affordable housing in the area. I like the design of the building as well and the that the materials are materials that are related to the buildings in the area. Now the question is about parking. I want to pick you back on a comment or a question I made
for a project earlier today. This is affordable housing and I'm really interested in getting information from your team about parking. you have uh underground or below podium parking spaces and also you have surface space
uh parking spaces. So do you have a sense of how much money will the project have to spend to build that parking the underground and the surface just to have a sense of per unit per space in terms of how that affect the creation of our
for the old housing here? So, I can take that. Uh, the the parking spaces that are below grade will be for staff only. Um, it was several million dollars. Uh, I can get an exact uh number for you. Be happy to provide that
information. It is significant, but we do require it for our our staff parking. Um, for the 41 units of affordable housing, we are not providing um parking specific for those 41 units. So those units will be coming in. They will
not have available parking. We focus on senior housing. So our folks tend to be on the older side, our residents. Um they tend not to have vehicles, especially when coming over to a location uh like this with great transit and um and a very walkable neighborhood.
So um those parking spaces will have the visitor parking that will be the surface lot. Um and then the below grade parking would be for staff only and it is um I would say about 350,000
per unit of parking to build below grid. >> 350,000 per unit. Okay. Thank you. We received some comments from others who are concerned about traffic. So since parking will be mostly for staff, what will be the peak hours for the
traffic movement for this building? So our peak uh for the additional 41 units uh of parking it is approximately uh five uh five trips per peak hour in the in
the um evening and I believe it's four during the day. So because there's only 41 units of additional parking, the delta in uh additional trips per day is fairly limited. So do you believe that that will not create a huge impact on the aers?
>> Correct. Uh we've worked really closely with BPDA. We will continue to work closely with um the traffic uh the BTD, the bus Boston transportation department to implement no parking zones along Bowford Road to make sure that all drop
offs and and pickups are happening in that uh visitor parking area, that surface lot where all our deliveries will be occurring as well. Um, so we're working very very hard to make sure both operationally and with signage that all
drop offs and pickups um are occurring in that that current surface block. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Vieira. Madam Chair, have any more questions? >> Any other questions from the board? May I have public testimony? >> Yes, madame chair, members of the board.
Conor Newman with the mayor's office of neighborhood services. At this time, the mayor's office this board sent a sent back information on the community process. Uh this went through a lengthy Boston planning le process over a year uh involving uh a handful of uh community meetings.
As you heard, originally was proposed with 71 units of uh uh incomerestricted affordable uh housing units for seniors. This was dramatically scaled back to 41 um after feedback from neighbors uh related to concerns about heights as
well as the proposed density. Uh the applicant worked very closely with uh these neighbors over the course of this lengthy process ultimately securing non-opposition um from the Jamaica Pond Association uh and support from the uh Jamaica Plane Neighborhood Council. Uh with that, I'll defer to the board. Uh I
will say that many recognize in the community this is a vital project uh for providing uh affordable housing for seniors so that they can stay in the neighborhood, stay in the city. Thank you. >> Next we have so develop. >> Good morning again madam chair and
members of the board. Zoe Dval here standing in for my colleague Camille Plat Costa the planning department this morning. Um this project submitted their PNF on December 20th 2024. They file they held two article 80 public meetings. The first on February 6, 2025,
followed by subsequent meeting on November 12, 2025. Both meetings were extremely well attended and in the interim, the project was greatly shaped and improved based on community feedback that included comments regarding massing height and design and the circulation of
the site. As mentioned, in parallel with the community process, the project went in front of BCDC for review and received a vote of approval on November 18th, 2025. Project received approvals from the BPDA board on January 15th, 2026. Um, the Boston Planning Department wants
to voice their support for the project presented to you today as it reflects both city and community feedback that was discussed throughout the article 80 process. Thank you. >> Next, we have Noruts. Nora, we cannot hear you. >> We can't hear you.
>> Can you hear me now? There it is. >> Yes. >> Morning, madam chair, members of the board. My name is Nora Lutz and I'm the development office member of the neighborhood housing division for the mayor's office of housing. The Roger Bilbert project represents a strategic investment in affordable housing for older adults in the city of Austin. This
project has been modified significantly from earlier proposals thanks to feedback from community members and local organizations. The writers team has applied to ML's annual funding round during our 2020 life cycle and ML supports this project. Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Okay. Next we have Salman. Yes, thank you. Um, I'm Sally Zimmerman, Six Bowfort Road. I'm appearing on behalf of my neighbors at Six Bowfort Road. And in recognition of a letter we submitted opposing dimensional
variations, particularly height and parking for the Roger projects at 11/31 Bowfort and 434 Jamaica Way. We respectfully request the ZBA's consideration of their authority under the conditional use provisions of the code and noting that the conditional use
has been in place since the 1950s and the forbidden use of adult daycare since the 1990s. We support both uses but note the board's capacity to attach conditions and safeguards necessary to assure harmony with the code. We further
note that this project is phase one of a two-phaseed project that will substantially expand the existing character and extent of Roger's operations and structures. A modest modest further reduction in height and an increase in parking will greatly
enhance the harmony of this valuable project with the character of our low-rise neighborhood. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next we have Oh, I'm not sure if Alfredo he was going to comment about this. If
not, yes, you can unmute yourself now. Um, >> Alfredo, if you can unmute yourself. If not. Okay.
I don't think that he's going to comment on this, Madam Chair. >> Okay. >> Is the applicant want to respond to any of the concerns, the height and the parking? >> Yeah. So we have uh as as mentioned by a few folks on this call we have worked
significantly to significantly reduce the height from seven and significantly reduce the unit count as well from 71 to 41. So we have worked very hard to address a lot as many of the concerns as we possibly can from the neighborhood.
Um and we feel that the current the project is currently designed um takes a balance between size and delivering affordable units into the city and also taking in those concerns. >> Okay. Any additional comments from the
board? >> Yes. Uh just to confirm, Mr. Vira, you mentioned that the project initially had 71 units and then was reduced to 41. >> Correct. was based on community process or financing.
>> A community process. >> Thank you. >> Okay. With that, may I have a motion? >> Madam Sher, I would like to make a motion of approval. I think this project already went through a very robust community process. reducing the unit
count will provide less affordable units for seniors but still some uh units that could be I mean um used by the people that we really try to support the most in our town in our city. So with that I make a motion of approval.
>> There a second. >> Second. >> Second. >> Mr. Sunbridge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencio. >> Yes. >> Mr. Langum. Yes, >> Mr. Bernell. >> Yes.
>> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Next, we have case BOA 181 0476 with the address of 69 Brent Street. If the applicant and or their
representative present, would they please explain to the board? >> Hi, my name is Mauricioi. I'm a project manager for Wolf Carpenters. We represent 69 Brand Street of Ado as a Dorchester project. Uh good
morning, ma'am. Good morning, chair members. Uh the project has been improving existing unfinished basement to a livable space. Um, we're going to create an area for a uh family room, uh,
watching TV, relaxing, uh, a bathroom, and, um, one small closet. Um, we're not adding anything on the footprint of the existing house. Uh, it's just improving what already is there. Um, and that's
basically the project. >> Thank you. Questions from the board. Hearing none. May I have follow testimony? >> Madame chair and members of the board. For the record, my name is Jeremy Bimbury. I serve as the Dorchester community engagements restless for the
office of neighborhood services. The applicant has completed the community process which consisted of an meeting facilitated on March 10th with two guests present. The proponent presented the details of the project and responded to questions from attendees and one of the voice support for the proposal. Following the August meeting, the proponent was connected to creative
comments for neighborhood council where they voted in support of the proposal which completed the committee process. Thank you for your time in the mayor's office of neighborhood services would like to defer to the board with their judgment. >> Next we have Liam Remis. >> Hello madam chair, members of the board
Liam Re's office like go on record and support this proposal. Thank you. Thank you, >> madam chair with no additional comments. >> Then may I have a motion? >> Motion to approve. >> I have a second.
>> Second. >> Mr. Stebridge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia? >> Yes. >> Mr. Langum? >> Yes. >> Mr. Bernell? >> Yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. Good.
>> Thank you very much, madam. You guys have a nice day. >> Thank you. You too. >> Madam Chair, the next case has been deferred. So that will take us to case BOA 1829
82 with the address of 102 Night Gale Street. If the applicants and their representative are present, would they please explain to the board? >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Stembridge, Madam Chair, members of the board. Attorney Ryan Spitz with Adams and Morancey,
business address of 1688 Street, First Floor, South Boston. Uh, joining me today is the owner, Augustine Kim, and the project architect, Tim Johnson. The application in front of you today is to erect a new three-story, three family residential building on a vacant lot.
This type of use is allowed in this subdist of a 3F5000 and is entirely consistent with the surrounding neighborhood fabric. The parcel is approximately 3,230 ft, measuring approximately 30t 4 ft wide and 95 ft deep. A typical lot
configuration for this block. The lot is presently vacant and the proposed development would bring three new housing units to an underly underutilized parcel in a residential neighborhood. Proposed building is three stories and a three family, the predominant building type within this immediate neighborhood. The immediate
adjacent lot is the same dimensions as this subject parcel and already contains a building of similar massing in use. This project simply fills the gap. One unit will also be offered as affordable through the mayor's office of housing. We have violations for lot area, lot
width, frontage, and additional lot area. Again, the lot is 3,230 ft² where 7,500 ft² is required for a three family, 5,000 for the for the first two units plus 2500 square ft per additional unit. The lot width is 34 ft
where 35 ft is required. These are pre-existing conditions that are common violations in the surrounding context. We have a floor area ratio violation. The proposed F is a 1.5 against the maximum of a8, but again it's a common violation in the surrounding context due
to the sizes and the massings of the buildings already built in the in this neighborhood. Sideyard violation proposed sideyard is 4 ft where 10 ft is required and is a common violation in the surrounding context arising from the narrow width and the of the law. Front
yard depth is in line with the neighboring homes. as a modal setback, noting that we shouldn't have been cited for zoning relief. Regardless, any front yard variation is consistent with the established building line of the street. Parking, we have two off street parking spaces are required. Uh none are being
provided here. However, it is aligned with the mayor's initiative reducing dependency on private vehicles. And the last violation we have is for screening and buffering due to the mechanical coral. Planning department's recommendation is approval with the single provisal that the plans be submitted for design review to minimize
the visibility of the rooftop mechanical coral. The rooftop plan already incorporates a 30-in power pit cornice and the mechanical coral is set back from the street facing the parap pit. The team here is prepared if approved to address any sort of screening to the
department satisfaction. At this point, u madam chair, I'm going to turn it back over to you and the board for any questions or comments. >> Thank you. Are there any questions from the board? >> May I have public testimony? >> Madam chair and members of the board for the record, my name is John Reuben. I'm
the doest community engagement specialist for the office of services. The applicant has completed community process which consists of an abot meeting facilitated on March 24th and with noers present and no additional community process required. The proposal was approved to be full. The proponent has advised our office as you have heard
that one of the three nights will be offered as a portable go through the mayor's office of house. Thank you for your time in the mayor's office of neighborhood services would like to defer to the board. >> Thank you. >> Nextia from councelor world's office. >> Hi. Yes. Thank you madam chair members
of the board. Um Anastasia from councelor war's office of district 4. Um, councelor Lala would like to defer to the board but express um his concern about the project not offering any home ownership units despite that being um a
long ask from the community. Um so we'd like to defer to the board. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Madam Chair, there are no additional comments. >> Madam Chair, if I can just rebut these are home ownership units, too. >> Great. Thank you.
With that, may I have a motion? May I have a motion? Madam >> Chair, motion of approval. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Stebridge? >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia? >> Yes.
>> Mr. Langum? >> Yes. Yes. >> Mr. Bernell? >> Yes. >> Chair Wils? Yes. The motion carried below. >> Great. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. >> Madame Chair, the next case has also
been deferred. So that will take us to case BOA 1 181910 with the address of 24 Neon Crescent. If the applicant and or their representative present, would they
please explain the case to the board? Yeah, this is Yeah, this is Ging Joe. Um, uh, we are, uh, living in 24 Nan Crescent. Uh, we have, um, sorry, I'm the homeowner of
this house. Uh, we are requesting approval of a a second floor and rear uh, a addition to our existing single family house. Uh our family has lived in this house uh and with over two growing
um children. Um so we are seeking for additional living space. Um um a second full bathroom um to better meet our family need. Um so this is overflow plan
and if you uh can see this plan that uh to mitigate um some uh um privacy concerns. So we don't have the uh in our back uh in the addition on our back side. Um we don't have the wind uh
window uh on our uh right side. Uh and uh that that will be a closet. Um and on the uh right left side we are seeking for a minor relief of the v uh the sideyard uh variation. uh cuz uh the
current house is already like 6 6.5 uh 8 ft uh to our uh setback and by removing the uh like up uh the stairs we are actually uh extend that to uh about 10
ft. So uh yeah this is uh where any questions? >> Thank you. Any questions from the board? May I have public testimony? >> Madam Chair and members of the board, for the record, my name is Jeremy Benbury. I'm the Jamaica Plan community
engagement specialist for the Office of Services. The applicant has completed the community process which consisted of a governor's meeting facilitated on March 3rd and was attended by two guests. No issues or concerns were raised during the meeting. Next, the proponent presented the proposal to Jamaica Hills Association on March 11th
and Jamaica Plane Neighborhood Council on April 15th where the proposal received approved. Thank you for your time in the mayor's office of native services would like to defer to the board with the judge. >> Thank you. >> Next we have a Algassim.
>> Yes. I hope you can hear me. >> Yes sir. >> Um yes I'm um a neighbor of 24. Um, I have concern about the extension to the south,
which is basically a twostory uh building in front of my uh one-story bedroom. So, that's my concern. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Um, chair, there are no additional comments.
>> The applicant like to briefly address that concern before we go. >> Um, yes. Uh so um in over uh uh as I mentioned previously uh that we will uh we have a closet
um at the back back uh extension. So we don't have a window to like our to look to our neighbors. Um and uh yeah I think that's uh like I'll address this.
>> Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions from the board? May I have a motion? >> Motion to approve. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Sambridge? >> Yeah.
>> Mr. Valencia? >> Yes. >> Mr. Langum? >> Yes. >> Mr. Bernell? >> Yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. Good luck, ma'am. >> Thank you. Madame Chair, the next two cases have
been deferred. So that takes us to the hearing scheduled for 11:00 a.m. >> Um, at this time, we'll ask if there are any requests for withdrawals or
deferrals from the 11 a.m. time frame. >> And just a reminder, we are a five person, five member board. And with that, we will go to case BOA 184 2748
with the address of 33 Hawthorne Street. If the applicant and or their representative are present, will they please explain the case to the board? >> Thank you, Mr. Ste. Thank you, Madam Chair, members of the board. Attorney Jeff Drago with Drago and Tuscano with
the business address of 11 Beacon Street here on behalf of the applicant. Uh the project in front of you is 33 Hawthorne Hawthorne Street. Don't know if we could pull up the plans
the ambassador. There we go. Great. Thank you. Uh uh this is a pretty straightforward proposal. We're looking to change the occupancy. It's an existing two family dwelling uh to a three family dwelling and that would be by adding a dwelling unit in the
basement uh that has a ceiling height of se that will have a ceiling height of 7'6 and two full means of egress. We're also uh there is some attic space that exists now uh so we're proposing putting a dormer around the building uh to add some to make that space more livable uh
and it would create some additional bedrooms uh for the building. But all of the work would be contained within the existing building um itself and that is why BPD recommended an approval as well. If we could go for the next slide
please. This just shows uh composition of buildings in the area. You've got uh some a lot of twos, some threes uh some larger buildings as you go uh down the street as well. If you can go to the next slide please. And these are just street view. Goose
next slide. We'll get into the site plan I believe. And we get into the plans now. So uh what the uh the the new layout or the the basement which is unit B would be a 685 square ft unit. Uh first floor uh
1136. Uh the uh basement would have two bedrooms, one bath. Uh unit one uh would have two bedrooms, two baths at, 1136 square ft. And then unit two would be a four bedroomedroom family size unit uh
three bath 1,786 square ft. Uh the uh we we also have two tandem spaces. Now as we worked with community process uh we added an additional space. So there will be three
uh parking spaces on the left side where the driveway uh is existing. Uh now there would also be also be a separate area in the basement for your utility room with its own entrance and as I had mentioned this would have two full means of egress. Uh my clients really looking
to utilize the space uh within the building. Uh this does is a very 10-minute walk uh to the Roslandale Village MBTA and multiple bus routes. So great for those folks commuting. Uh the areas that did require or were asking
for zoning relief is F uh slightly. So going from a 0.55 still under one to a.99. With the dormers it it raises the height of the building a half a story. So uh this would become 35 ft uh 3 1/2 in but
a three-story building because of because of the dormer. And then parking, uh, we would need relief for that. Although we do have the three created spaces and it's a great MBTA location for for MBTA type use. With that, I can
answer any questions that the the board may have. >> Thank you. Are there questions from the board? >> Uh, yes, Madam Chair. Um, Chiego, I think I've heard you say the for the basement it would be 7 foot6 in height.
>> Correct. Yes. Um yes sir with two means of >> um as for living space does that include bedrooms? >> Yes. So there would be two bedrooms uh in the in the basement uh itself in the
basement space and that area is 685 square foot unit. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Any other questions from the board? is I'm just wondering is this owner occupied or or just
>> it has housed families. Um there's a a a long-term tenant that's there that will remain in the building as well. Uh family has lived in it uh over the years. Yes. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> May I have public testimony?
>> Madam Chair and members of the board for the record, my name is Jeremy Bry. I'm the Rosslandale community engagement specialist for the office of neighborhood services. The applicant has completed the community process which consisted of an abundance meeting facilitated on March 12th where several attendees raised concerns regarding the proposal. Parking was the most frequent
discussed issue with multiple attendees expressing concern that the proposed development would reverse and existing parking in the area. Residents noted that parking is already limited due to nearby community usages such as a public school and the lack of direct rapid transit access and question whether proposed off street parking would be
sufficient to accommodate future residents. Attendees also inquired whether the proposed units would be rental to condos condominiums as well as the availability of affordable housing units within the development. Several attendees inquired about the impact of the project on the existing long-term
tenants. Additional concerns including the overall size and scale of the proposal with some attendees stating that they felt the project was excessive and out of character with the surrounding neighborhood as well as the potential impact of exterior lighting on the adjacent properties. One attendee expressed support for the proposal while
similarly requesting information regarding again the future of the current long-term resident. As you heard uh they will not be remaining on the property. Next, the proponent presented to West Village Neighborhood Association which completed the community process. Thank you for your time in the members
office services would like to defer to the board with their judgment. >> Thank you. >> Next we have both. >> Hi. Yes. Um I'm a resident uh living on Hawthorne Street. Um I understand that um the proposal was to say there's
numerous other three families. Uh this neighborhood is a single family, two family neighborhood. We do have a community center, the old Rosenale High School. We have been inundated with uh numerous traffic now as stated by Jeremy with the um Washington Irving school
becoming the Sarah Roberts school which has combined two schools. Parking is tight. We have people who park from the social security office uh around the corner when they make visits there, employees to the library. The street is very dense at this time.
Um understanding that um the space will be rented in the basement. Um I don't know does a basement get uh single use or is it something that's applied to the tenant on the first floor and um also
too as stated u we've had uh rentals there before it seems like we have um a rental to um traveling nurses so the street does get inundated with uh numerous cars people from Maine New Hampshire people traveling in working
six months a year seven months a there. Um, understanding that the city does need um, more residencies. Um, I don't know if a three family fits the fabric of this neighborhood. Um, and it is dense at this time already. Um, so that would be
my comment to this. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. We don't have additional comments. >> If I may respond, Madam Chair. >> Yes. >> Just a couple of points. Uh, one on the tenant. Uh we actually submitted a
letter from the tenant that they will be uh remaining on the property and they've been very happy at the site. Um and and that's our plan is to keep uh any tenants that are there in the property uh or if they so choose another property that the owner does own. Uh two, we
actually uh created an additional parking spot just to address some of the neighbors concerns about parking as well. Um even though this is as I had mentioned 10 minutes uh walk to the uh Roslandale Village station as well. Uh
in the BPD recommendation it even mentions that eventually it's likely these basement units would be as of right now they're not um because it's a good use of creating housing with a with keeping a building uh footprint as it is. So the uh attic space is already
existing has living space up there. All we were looking to do was make it more functional. Um, we do not use that now, but by making the dormer, it actually creates some additional space as well. Um, everything in the the basement would be sprinklered, uh, have full egresses,
egress windows. Um, and all of these plans were prepared by David Frerieded from Chum and he's also on the call as well. So, thank you. >> Thank you. Any other questions from the board? May I have a motion?
Madam Chair, I'll make a motion of approval. >> There's a second. >> Second. >> Mr. Stebridge? >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia? >> Yes. >> Mr. Langum?
>> Yes. >> Mr. Bernell? >> Yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. Good luck. >> Thank you very much. Thank you. Next we have case BOA 1813709 with the address of 36 to 44 Broad
Street. If the applicant and their representative are present, would they please explain to the board? >> Yes. Thank you. >> Anything else? I I've got some We've got some >> I know. Can we mute whoever is not speaking?
>> Thank you. Okay. Uh this is Michael Jamo uh representing Verizon Wireless from law firm Robinson and Cole with my colleague Maline Newman. uh Selco Partnership which does business as Verizon Wireless is seeking relief under article 6 to install a rooftop wireless
facility. Um if we can go to the the next slide it's um the facilities at 34 36 to 44 Broad Street which is the building that occupies the downtown block surrounded by Broad Central India and Milk Street. Um the proposed
facility consists of and if we could go to slide six at this point. Um, thank you. So, it consists of three sectors of four antennas each. And if you look at the yellow highlighting there, um, all the antennas are fully enclosed within
canisters that will be painted or wrapped to match the appearance of the building facade so that the antennas themselves are not visible. There's a total of nine canisters, three for each section sector. Um, in the the right lower quadrant of that plan, you can see
two of the sectors. one's facing Milk Street, one's facing Broad Street. In those sectors, the canisters will be mounted to the back of the building parapit on pole mounts. Um, and for these two se for these two sectors,
um, pardon me. Uh, for these for these two sectors, the uh, relief is required from the roof setback uh, the the 10-ft setback from the edge of the roof provision under uh, article 86. Um, and these antennas need that relief because
they need to be able to see over the edge of the building to operate properly. The third sector consists of three antennas on pole mounts uh to the existing penthouse on the building roof. Those are the other three yellow highlighted circles in the left middle of the the plans. These require relief
from the provision which limits the height above the roof to 20 ft or 20% of building height. The canisters exceed that standard, but they are only 8 ft above the level of the existing penthouse roof. Um, the installation will also include battery cabinets and other equipment needed to operate the
wireless facility that will be on a platform mounted on the roof. And that's the green highlighted area up there. Um, if you turn to slide four, please. Um, Verizon Wireless needs this proposed facility in order to maintain high
quality wireless service in the downtown area. Um, the proposed facility will handle some of the demand on the wireless network in the busy area east of Post Office Square, enhancing the performance of the surrounding Verizon wireless sites that are operating at or
near capacity. So the targeted area is the area with the hatching uh in the picture and as you can see that will offload um demand on the surrounding sites in post office square government center the site called central artery um
and will provide better service. Um the proposed facility uh is needed in order to uh propose proposed relief is needed in order to allow the antennas to function properly. Facility will have minimal impacts. it will not have any
greater impacts um than uh than a conforming application would be because the antennas will be hidden within the cylindrical enclosures to present a neat appearance. Um the proposed facility will benefit the neighborhood and the city as a whole. It will provide improved wireless service for residents
and others working and traveling in the downtown area. Um the application includes a narrative addressing all the standards for relief and we would h be happy to answer any questions you might have. I have Keith Valente who's a the RF engineer on this site available by
phone. >> Thank you. Any questions from the board? >> May I have public testimony? >> Um madam chair, members of the board, my name is Eva Jones representing the mayor's office and neighborhood services regarding 36 to 44 Broad Street. office
differs to the board's judgment. A community process was conducted including distribution of a subcommittee flyer mailed on February 25th, 2026. This outreach generated three responses from community members. Two respondents sought additional information regarding the proposal and after receiving
clarification, one indicated that they um would voice non-oposition to the project. Uh, one letter of opposition was also submitted citing concerns about the visual impact and of the proposed antennas on top the building. This letter has also been submitted to the board. The proposal was also reviewed
but by the Warf District Neighborhood Association which voted in support of the project and has also submitted a formal letter to the board. At this time, the mayor's office and neighborhood services defers to the board's judgment on this matter. Thank you, Madam >> Chair. We don't have additional
comments. With that, may I have a motion? >> Motion to approve. >> Is there a second? >> Mr. Stebridge, >> Mr. Stebridge. You're >> sorry about Sorry about that, Madam
Chair. Yes. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Valencia. >> Yes. >> Mr. Langum. Yes, >> Mr. Bernell. >> Yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you very much. >> Okay, with that, it looks like we have a break until 12:00 p.m. for the court rebound. See you all then. Correct.