The City of Boston zoning board of appeal hearing for December 16th, 2025 is now in session. This hearing is being conducted in accordance with the applicable provisions of the open meeting law, including the updated provisions enacted by the legislature
this year. The new law allows the board to continue its practice of holding virtual hearings through June 2027. This hearing of the board is being held remotely via the Zoom webinar event platform and is also being recorded.
In order to ensure this hearing of the board is open to the public, members of the public may access this hearing through telephone and video conferencing. The information connecting to this hearing is listed on today's agenda, which is posted on the public notices page of the city's website,
boston.gov. Members of the public will enter the virtual hearing as attendees, which means you will not see yourself on the screen, and you will be muted throughout unless administratively unmuted when asked to comment. Board members, applicants, and their attorneys or representatives will
participate in the hearing as panelists, and they will appear alongside the presentation materials when speaking. Panelists are strongly encouraged to keep video on while presenting to the board. As with our in-person meetings, comments
in support will be followed by comments in opposition. The order of comments is as follow. elected officials, representatives of elected officials, and members of the public. The chair may limit the number of people called upon to offer comment and the time for
commenting as time constraints require. For that reason, the board prefers to hear from members of the public who are most impacted by 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 the bottom of your screen in the Zoom webinar platform. Click it again and your hand should go down. When the host sees your hand, you will receive a request to unmute yourself. Select yes and you should be able to talk. If you
are connected to the hearing by telephone, please press star 9 to raise and lower your hand. You must press star six to unmute yourself after you receive the request from the host. Those called upon to comment will be asked to state their name and address first and then
they can provide their comment. In the interest of time and to ensure that you have enough time to do so, please raise your hand as soon as Mr. Stumbridge reads the address into the record. Do not raise your hand before the relevant address is called or the meeting host will not know to call on
you at the appropriate time. We ask that you keep your comments brief and all public testimony will be limited to 90 seconds per speaker. >> Thank you, Mr. Stebridge. >> Morning, Madam Chair President.
>> Good morning, Mr. Valencia. >> Good morning, Madam Chair. President, >> good morning, Miss Turner. >> Good morning, Madam Chair President. >> Good morning, Mr. Langum. >> Good morning, Madame Chair President. >> Good morning, Mr. Collins. >> Morning, Madam Chair. Present.
>> Good morning, Miss Panado. >> Good morning, Madam Chair. I'm present. >> Good morning. The floor is yours, Mr. Stebridge. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. We'll begin with the approval of hearing minutes scheduled for 9:30 a.m. These minutes
are from the meetings of December 6th and December 9th. I'll make a motion that uh approve. >> Is there a second? Second. >> Mr. Stumbridge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia.
>> Yes. >> Miss Turner. >> Yes. >> Mr. Langum. >> Yes. >> Mr. Collins. >> Yes. >> Miss Bonado. >> Yes. >> Chair votes. Yes. The motion carries.
Next, we'll move on to the extensions scheduled for 9:30 a.m. I will read through all of the um all the extension requests. They all appear to be reasonable
um at the after I finish reading uh turn it over to Madam Chair in case there are any questions on on anything. We'll begin with case BOA134 4283 with the address of one
Ralding Road. Next we have case BOA 1263429 with the address of 329 Galvin Boulevard. Next we have case BOA 1137716
with the address of 1750 to 1758 Dorchester Avenue. Next we have case BOA 836636 with the address of 603 Dorchester Avenue. And the last request for
extension is KOA133 5853 with the address of 46 Park Street. And those are the extensions requested for today. >> Thank you. Any questions from the board? May I have a motion to grant the
extensions as requested? >> Motion to grant the extensions as requested. >> Second. >> Thank you, Mr. Mr. Mbridge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia. >> Yes. >> Miss Turner. >> Yes. >> Mr. Langel.
>> Yes. >> Mr. Collins. >> Yes. >> Miss Bonado. >> Yes. >> Chair. The motion carries. >> Next, we have a request for extension of time to follow decision scheduled for
9:30 a.m. U. This is case BOA 173 33319 with the address of 22 Pratt Street. If the applicant and the andor their representative are present, will they
please explain this to the board or if the board would just like to vote on it, we can move ahead in that direction also. Any questions or concerns from the board hearing? None. Is there a motion?
>> Motion to approve. >> Second. >> Thank you. Mrs. Stebridge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia. >> Yes. >> Miss Turner. >> Yes. >> Mr. Langum. >> Yes. >> Miss Mr. Collins.
>> Yes. Miss Ponado, >> yes. >> Chair votes. Yes. The motion carries. >> Next, we have two board final operative cases scheduled for 9:30 a.m. First is case BOA
126 3429 with the address of 28A Richmond Road. If the applicant and or their representative present, would they please explain to the board? >> Good morning. Uh this is Felix Sanchez,
the applicant. Um we're we're here in front of the board today uh because we would like to request a uh a a uh to zoning or release or a relief of a a front motor alignment
AR uh motor parking alignment and the rear setbacks of these uh proposed project that uh that we're working on. Those are not the actual plans that we will be talking about. It has been
modified. We sent them in yesterday and uh it looks like they have not been uploaded yet. Uh >> does the team have access to that? I can email I can email them to you guys
if uh >> I don't I don't know if you feel you can speak to it with what's here or if able to access what he sent >> yesterday I sent it to Steph
sorry it's Caroline um did you upload new plans >> it was yes we sent in the actual uh plans for the uh the front alignment model alignment. >> We're going to have the plans examiner
is going to have to review the updated plans. >> So, we'll have to defer this to another date. >> Okay. All right. >> I believe um I believe as this reaches I'm also with 28A Ron Road and I believe
um Mark Joseph Cheryl the plan examiner already reviewed it. I'm just not sure why they're not updated, but um if >> Oh, wait. >> Madam Sher would like us to speak on this one on what we have available right now. Um we could we could, you know, certainly speak on this one so we could
just keep the process moving forward. >> Yeah. I mean, I I would like to not delay you if we don't have to. So, if you feel you can speak based on what's in front of you and just explain what you changed or what, that would be great. >> You want to put up on that reg. So
basically um what we performed um is a front model alignment. Uh we the front model alignment we determined that the properties directly across from us and also the one next to us which is 26 on real road and 25 Ron Road they're they
only have a uh we were we were able to shrink our our um our front yard setback due to them only be having 10 ft and only having 11 ft on the other side. So that way we're able to increase our we're able to shift the house back. So
as you see the property I mean I don't know if you see my pointer but we're able to shift the house back towards the rear in order to to have front parking front horizontal parking in the front of this house. Um you know by having the 20 ft
>> which is what we need for for the parking spot. Okay. >> Are there questions from the board? Okay, hearing none. Is there a motion? >> And madam chair, I just want to clarify the board's voting on these plans. If
there are new plans since this was submitted, it will need to be reviewed by the plans examiner again. >> So what does that mean? That >> that I've seen so far as well. >> Sorry, dude. What' you say? >> So these are the only plans that I've seen so far. I don't
>> correct. >> That's drawing. So, so the the plans that we committed yesterday have not been uploaded to your to your portal. >> It sounds examiner still needs to review them and that could take up to two weeks. >> So, it sounds like we do need to defer.
>> Yes. >> Do you have a date for them, Caroline? >> We could do February 24th. >> That's way too far. >> We we have a we have a a a an issue here. you know, the owner has a
um a loan, okay, that is going to mature in March, uh in March. So, if we move this, it's going to take him way too long for him to get an extension on his on this construction loan. So, >> I apologize, but
>> I mean, we submitted the plans yesterday morning. That's not >> and then we sent the ones revised because Mark Mark Joseph's uh picked up something on the plans and we revised it and stamped them and resent them back to
the >> So unfortunately sir it it does sound like it needs to be deferred and hopefully you know maybe something else frees up before that that Caroline can reach out to you if that is the case but I think the date she said is the earliest that they have at this moment.
So, um, with with that, may I have a motion? >> Motion to defer till February the 24th. >> Second, >> Mr. Stebridge, >> yes. >> Mr. Valencia, >> yes. >> Miss Turner,
>> yes. >> Mr. Langum, >> yes. >> Mr. Collins, >> yes. >> Miss Pado, >> yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. We'll see you then. Next we have another board final arbiter
case which is case BO8 1261313 with the address of 154 Terrace Street. If the applicant and or their representative are present or they please explain Mr. Luna, is this your case? Your hand
has been up. >> Um, no. My case is 170396. >> Can you put Can you put your hand down then? >> Okay. >> Is the applicant present for 154 Terrace Street? >> Do you see anyone who's
>> um Joe Federico, I'm going to send to you the request to be promoted to the panel section. If this is your case, please this is the opportunity to speak. >> If not, Madam Chair,
>> can you hear me? >> Uh, we can hear you now, sir. >> I I've got my camera on. I'm not sure why it's not showing up there, but um Hi, Madam Chair. I'm Joe Federico. I'm the owner and developer for the 154 Terroristry project. Um, unfortunately,
I am going to have to seek a deferral until February. Um, I was contacted by the Boston Planning Department yesterday and they asked that I defer this until the um, notice of project change that I
filed um, has been voted on. Um, so if we could get scheduled for late February, that would be great. >> Thank you. Caroline, is that February 24th still available? >> Yes. Okay. May I have a motion?
>> Motion to defer till February 24th. >> Second. >> Second. >> Mr. Valencia. >> Yes. >> Mr. Stumbridge. >> You're on mute. Mr. Stumbr. >> Yes, Madam Chair. >> Thank you. Miss Turner. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Langum. >> Yes. >> Mr. Collins. >> Yes. >> Miss Pado. >> Yes. Chair votes yes. The motion carries. We'll see you then. >> Great. Thank you very much. >> Next, we have a groundwater conservation overlay district case scheduled for 9:30
a.m. This is case BOA 1758750 with the address of 20 Milford Street. If the applicants andor their representative present, would they please explain?
Hi. Uh, my name is Nick. I'm with the Holland Companies. I'm representing Joseph Holland. Um, this is pretty standard. We we intend to fully comply with the GCOD plans. These are our stamp BWSC approved plans uh for our
groundwater conservation um system in the back. >> Hey, is Mr. Selli on to confirm that? >> Yes, I am, Madam Chair. Good morning, Madam Chair, members of the board. Christian Simmonelli, Boston Groundwater
Trust. We have both G-Card letters from the applicant. >> Thank you. Any questions from the board? May I have a motion? >> Make a motion to approve. >> There a second. >> Second, >> Mr. Stebridge.
>> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia? >> Yes. >> Miss Turner? >> Yes. >> Mr. Langum? >> Yes. >> Mr. Collins? Yes, >> Miss Pado. >> Yes. >> Yes. The motion carries. Good luck.
>> Thanks. Appreciate your time. >> Next, we'll go through the hearing schedule for 9:30 a.m. Uh before we do that, we'll ask if there are any requests for withdrawals or
deferrals from the 9:30 a.m. time frame. >> Mr. Luna, are you seeking a deferral? >> Yes, I am, Madam Chair. >> Okay. Can you please state the address? >> Um, yes. Um, first of all, it's BOA number one. >> Mr. Sambridge will go through that. What is the address? >> 33 Princeton Street. Applicant is
Richard Barach. >> Okay. Last last case of the >> last case of the 930. So this is for case BOA70 39 64 with the address of 33 Princeton
Street. Would you go ahead please and explain? >> Uh yes uh madam chair, members of the board, my name is Joseph Luna. I am the project architect for this project representing Richard Varachi. Unfortunately, I have an unexpected legal matter I had to attend at 11:00 in
court in Gloucester. And since we are the last on the 9:30 time slot, I fear that I will not be able to um make the hearing that I need to go to. So, for that reason, I am requesting the earliest um possible hearing date for an
extension as my client is also currently tied up in a land a land, excuse me, a housing court dispute about this um with the city of Boston. I apologize for the short notice, but I have to uh be someplace else at 11:00. >> Understood. Thank you, Caroline.
>> And Madam Chair, we did know about this ahead of time and there was a January 13th, 2026 availability for that one. >> Yes. >> So with that, may I have a motion? >> Motion to defer to January 13th.
>> May I have a second? >> Again, Mr. Stebridge. >> Yes. Mr. Valencia, >> yes. >> Miss Turner, >> yes. >> Mr. Langum, >> yes. >> Mr. Collins, >> yes.
>> Miss Ponado, >> yes. >> Chair votes yes, the motion carries. See you then. Good luck. >> Thank you very much. Thank you for your help. If there are no other requests for withdrawals or deferrals from the 9:30 hearings,
we'll move ahead to the first case which is case BOA 1786776 with the address of 49 Oakview Terrace. If the applicant andor their representative are present, would they please explain to the board?
>> Hello, my name is um Alex Preio Missioner. I am um a current resident of Oak View Terrace. I live at 37 and we were able to purchase 49 Oakview Terrace um which is a single family home that we are planning to renovate and move our
family into. Um we're doing some we're doing a full gut renovation with some um minor extensions in the back and on the third floor through dormers and um I will have our architect Dan uh walk you through it. I
think he was trying to be made a panelist. I hope he got through. >> Yeah, I'm here. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Uh, Madame Chair and members of the board, thank you for taking the time to review this project. Um, as Alex said, we're renovating a uh to restore
an 1896 home, which includes the rear extension um some extensions of the dormer and to uh make the front of the home up to uh today's standards and uh more aesthetically pleasing for the street and for the the family to use.
Um, we can go through. So, this this site survey kind of shows the the update to the existing front porch. The existing front deck expands the full front of the home. We're reducing that to be about 50% of the home. Um, and
then on the the rear side of the the home, we're expanding the we're kind of squaring off the back of the house to make it all feel more cohesive and and expand the usable living space within the home. Um these are the existing
conditions of the home or the existing floor plans where um can you go back up to the sorry go back to the existing plans here? Yeah, these are the demo and existing
plans just to show the footprint of the existing home off the back. Um how it's kind of squaring off on level one, level two, and level three. So, if we scroll down to the overall plans, keep going. Um, so this is the the basement. This is
the ground floor. So, you can see off the rear, um, on the bottom left corner, we've squared that off with the the the back right side of the house to be able to expand their living area and have a more usable kitchen and dining uh, space. Um the the front of the house is
remaining as is other than the reduction of the front porch and the existing stairwell will remain. Um next slide. Uh as well as on this floor we're expanding on that bottom left of the
house um to accommodate another bathroom for their children. Next slide. And then on the third floor where that same extension off the back allows for the addition of their primary bedroom
with an office on the street side. And um there's existing dormers on the top of the house on the page on the top and bottom where the existing dormers where the staircase currently is. We're extending it down towards the rear of
the house to accommodate a primary bathroom. And then on the bottom of the page, we are extending that dormer to accommodate a larger walk-in closet for the family. Um, we can scroll to the elevations. Keep going.
Yep. So, this is the front of the of the house on the right. Um, you can see the reduction of the front porch and uh that allows a couple things. It makes the front a little nicer and then also it allows for some more daylight to come into their their front living space with
um where we have that bay window. Uh we can go to the next elevation and then this is the rear of the home where um you can see the profile on the back on the left side south elevation. We've squared that off so it's similar to the
front elevation and form and um accommodate a larger rear deck for them to have family meals and and outdoor space. >> Thank you. Are there questions from the board?
>> Hearing none, may I have public testimony? >> Madam chair and members of the board, for the record, my name is Jeremy. I am the Jamaica plane community engagement specialist for the office of neighborhood services. The applicant has completed the community process which consisted of an abode meeting facilitated on September 24th where the
proposal gained overwhelming support and praise for the design of the proposal as residents residents expressed how well it fits the character of the neighborhood and supports the family coming and remaining in the neighborhood. Next, the proposal was presented to Jamaica Plane Neighborhood Council on November 5th where they voted
to approve the proposal. Thank you for your time and the mayor's office of neighborhood services would like to defer to the vote for their judgment. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Yes, there is one person Gary, I'm not sure if you are looking to speak for this project. If no, there is no
additional >> um Can you hear me? >> Yes. >> Okay, great. So, I am a a long-term resident of Oakley Terrace. I live at 41 and have known Alex and her husband and four kids for some time. and just want
to speak uh in favor of this proposal. The house that they're they bought and now are moving into has been abandoned for the last two years because the previous owner died and uh be an enormous upgrade to the neighborhood for them to move there. But also they've
become um very very u critical partners in the neighborhood which has probably 20 kids all around that circle at the top 12 terrace. So I I encourage the board to approve their application. >> Thank you so much. With that, may I have
a motion? >> Motion. Make a motion for approval. >> May I have a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Stebridge? >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia? >> Yes. >> Miss Turner? >> Yes.
>> Mr. Langum? >> Yes. >> Mr. Collins? >> Yes. Miss Pado, >> yes. >> Chair votes, yes. The motion carries. Good luck, ma'am. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Next, we have case BOA 179 0998 with the address of 106 Selman Street. If the applicants and or their representative are present, would they
please please explain to the board? Uh good morning. Um my name is Matt Lawler. I am the um attorney for the applicant with the law firm of Robinson and Cole business address at 53 State Street uh in Boston. Thank you to the members of the board for the opportunity
to be here this morning. Um I'm joined this morning by Marie Moriceet from Massvi who is representing the developer. Um, as described in the appeal filings and is shown on the plans, the appeal relates to the parcel now owned by Mass 5, previously owned by the city of Boston, located at 106
Seldon Street in Dorchester. The proposal um for this property is uh the construction of one threestory multif family residential structure containing six units and six parking spaces. Four of the units would be affordable to households making up to 80% of AMI and
uh two of the units would be affordable up to households making uh 100% of AMI. All the units are home ownership. Um the mayor's office of housing designated the proponent as the developer for the subject property under the welcome home to uh BOS welcome home Boston phase 2
program. Um same plans and designs were submitted in connection with this appeal were previously submitted to and approved by the board for dimensional zoning relief in February this year. However, because the regulations do not allow for the construction of more than three dwelling units uh in a three
family 6000 subdist, the applicant subsequently filed an alteration permit to close out the zoning relief and obtained a required use variance under section six excuse me under article 65 section uh 65-8. So that's the purpose of being here this
morning is to close out the zoning relief for this property. Um at this point I will turn it over to Marie to provide more context. >> Good morning. Good morning. Thank you Matt for that overview. Um as Matt mentioned um this plan was previously
approved. We've made note u additional changes. We're you know hoping to come back here to secure and get your approval on the additional use variance. We have completed um a uh community process. We've spoke at all neighbors. There's an existing uh six units right
next door. Um again, plans haven't changed. We're still moving forward with everything and uh we're ready to deliver these new units to the community. So, thank you for your time. >> Thank you. Are there questions from the board?
>> Hearing none, we have public testimony. Madame chair and members of the board for the record my name is Jeremy Benbury. I am the excuse me I am the matter community engagement specialist for the office of neighborhood services. The applicant has completed the community process which consisted of a subcommittee notification
to all of Butters and receiving no community feedback. No further community process was required and the proposal was allowed to move forward. Our office is confident the proposal is non-controversial. Thank you for your time and the mayor's office services would like to defer to the board for their judgment. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. Madame chair, there are no additional comments. >> Okay, with that, may I have a motion? >> Motion to approve with pro uh proviso that the plans are submitted to the planning department for review for design review. >> Is there a second?
>> Second. >> Mr. Stebridge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia. >> Yes. >> Miss Turner. >> Yes. >> Mr. Langum. >> Yes. >> Mr. Collins. >> Yes.
>> Miss Bernado. >> Yes. >> Chair. Yes. Motion carries. Good luck. >> Thank you very much. Really appreciate it. >> You have a good day. >> Next we have case BOA1776123 with the address of 445 to 451 Columbia
Road. If the applicant or the representative present, will they please explain the case to the board? >> Hi, my name is Carlos Mariano. We uh I'm doing the virtual in order to
uh change the name of the business. >> Okay, questions from the ward. They have public testimony. >> Madam chair and members of the board, for the record, my name is Jeremy Benbury. I am the Doorchester community engagement specialist for the Office of Neighborhood Services. The applicant has completed the community process which
consisted of a subcommittee notification to all the voters and receiving no community feedback. No further committee process was required and the proposal was allowed to move forward. Our office is confident the proposal is not controversial. Thank you for your time and the mayor's office services would like to defer to the court for the judgment. >> Thank you. >> Thank you madam chair. No additional
comments. >> May I have a motion? >> Motion to approve. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Stebridge. Yes, >> Mr. Valencia. >> Yes, >> Miss Turner.
>> Yes, >> Mr. Langum. >> Yes, >> Mr. Collins. >> Yes, >> Miss Panado. >> Yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. Good luck. Next we have case BOA1784372
with the address of 10 to 18 Bordon Street. The applicant and or the representative present. Would they please explain? >> Good morning madame chair and members of the board. My name is Bonnie Tien with JCBT Architect. We're proposing a 2900
square ft new dining restaurant with a liquor bar at the ground level of a mixed juice building at the four corner plaza on Balden Street, Dorchester. The proposed Jamaican restaurant will have about 77 seats. Street parking is
allowed in the area. We are requesting relief for change of use and off- streetet parking and loading. The Merl restaurant, Merl Kitchen, has been around in this same neighborhood for a while and have received support from
numerous neighbors in the area. Uh, this is my presentation. Thank you. Any questions from the board? >> Hearing none, may I have public testimony. >> Madame chair and members of the board. For the record, my name is Jeremy
Member. I am the Doorchester community engagement specialist for the office of neighborhood services. The applicant has completed the community process which consisted of an abutis meeting facilitated on October 22nd where the proposal received overwhelming support from all in attendance including civic me civic members and councelor city
councelor Warell's office who all supported the much needed style of restaurant entering the underserved community. Next to proponent presented to United Neighborhood Association which completed the community process. To date our office has not received any further community feedback. Thank you for your time and the mayor's office neighborhood
services would like to defer to the board for the judgment. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Ch. Next we have Brian. >> Hi. Good morning madam chair, members of the board. Timothy Gemon from city councelor Brian Warell's office. We just like to reiterate our support. Uh we
think this would be a great addition uh to the four corners area and we would uh we'd like to see this go through. So thank you very much. >> Thank you >> madam chair. There are no additional comments >> with that. May I have a motion? >> Motion.
>> Is there a second? >> Yes. >> Mr. Stebridge? >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia? >> Yes. >> Miss Turner? >> Yes. >> Mr. Langum? >> Yes.
>> Mr. Collins? >> Yes. >> Miss Ponado? >> Yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. Good luck. >> Thank you. >> We have two companion article 8 cases. The first is case BOA
178 944 34. Okay. With the address of 29 to 29F Romy Street. Along with that we have case BOA1 1789440
with with the address of 33 Ramsey Street. If the applicant and their representative are present, will they please explain the cases to the board? >> Thank you, Mr. Stembridge. Good morning, Madam Chair, members of the board.
Attorney John Paulini on behalf of 2933 Ramsey Street LLC. With me this morning is William Christopher, the project architect. 29-33 Ramsey Street is both of these projects. The zoning is two family 4000. They comprise there are
four lots. When put together, the square footage is 25,271 square ft. I'm pleased to present this deeply affordable development proposal that underwent an article 80 process was approved by the BPD on July 17th uh
board hearing. This location currently has two vacant buildings. One is a dilapitated three family and the other is a commercial building that was once home to the Rice Amves post. The proposal before you is to raise these buildings and construct two new residential buildings. One will one
building which will be the 29 Ramsey will house seven three-bedroom market rate home ownership townhouse units with each unit having a dedicated singlecar garage parking. The unit program of this building will be seven three beds, 2 and a half baths.
Each will be a little over 2,000 ft. The other building at 33 Ramsey will contain 22 residential units with 11 garage parking spaces. The program for this building is 21 twobedrooms and one studio. In total, this proposal will have 12
income restricted units, which provides more than 40% affordability between the two buildings. As I stated, this proposal went through an article 80 process and in addition to the vast amount of affordability. The proposal was designed to pre preserve open space with nearly half the site to remain as
open space. Additionally, the proposal includes significant p public realm improvements such as pushing the building back from the sidewalk to provide wider sidewalks and compliance with the complete street guidelines as well as new landscaping along Rosie Street. At this point, I'll turn it over
to William Christopher to go through the plans. Thank you. >> Good morning, Madam Chair, members of the board. My name is William Christopher. I'm the architect for this project. Um, basically what uh we have done is uh analyzed this neighborhood to come up with uh a concept that allows
for the street fabrics to remain the same. Um, Ramsey Street Lane or Ramsey Street, Ramsey Place uh was an important uh article in in the new community and the owner was very sensitive to that and we we made sure to define that to hold
that into place. Basically, what we've done is we've uh taken the buildings and using the rhythm of the current street wall along Ramsey Street, we've developed the uh project as it is before you today. Um on the left hand side will be the uh rental units. On the right
hand side will be the town houses. Uh Ramsey Lane will be the primary access for for parking to the town houses into the apartments as well as a very usable outdoor play space for uh the families that we hope will be attending here.
>> Questions from the board. Yeah, Madam Chair. Okay. Um, I am very glad to see that the project is providing 40% of the units as affordable, but I didn't see any information about the area medium income for those affordable units. Do you have
any information about what the AMI will be for the affordable units? >> Yeah. So, it's a blend. That's a great question, Mr. Valencia. It's a blend. So, that it works out to be 80% uh affordability. >> 80%. That is the length.
>> It's a range. Yes. So it depends on it's through mass housing finance. So it's a range of it. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> With that, may I have public testimony? >> Hello madam chair, members of the board. My name is Eva Jones representing the mayor's office and neighborhood services
regarding 29th to 33 Ramsey Street. Our office defers to the board's judgment. A community process was conducted by the Boston Planning Department beginning on 72525. The feedback that my colleague, the Dorchester leazison Madison Foley has received from the community has been significant uh opposition regarding this
proposal. The community feels that the scale of the proposal is far too large and will impact the neighborhood's quality by removing sunlight from direct butters a stress uh excuse me a project of this scale will stress will have a stress on a small residential one-way street including on the parking. The
proposal was also reviewed by the Columbia 7 Hill Civic Association at their meeting on 71725. The association voted to oppose the proposal and has expressed that the size, scale, density, and design is not cohesive with the residential one-way street. And because of that, the
proposal has also received significant opposition from abutters and will significantly impact their quality of life in terms of sunlight, few corridors, privacy, and adverse traffic patterns. At this time, the mayor's office of neighborhood services defers to the board's judgment on this matter. Thank you everyone for your time and consideration.
>> Hello madam chair, members of the board, Liam Ring from councelor Fitzerald's office our office would like go on and record support this proposal. Thank you. >> Okay. Um next madam chair we have Jessica. Jessica you have 90 seconds to
provide your public testimony. >> Hello my name is Jessica Hayes. I live at 23 Ramsey Street. Um, I would just like to uh strongly oppose this and I hope everyone can take it into consideration the the neighborhood, the size of it. We're a small little one-way
street and this project is just way too big for what we think the street needs. Um, we I specifically my backyard I'll have no more privacy. The town homes will look directly on my
back porch. I there'll be no more trees that there's so many trees out there that that give me so much privacy that I feel uh will just be gone. And then um my talking about the the scale of the project, nothing on the street is taller than
three stories beside the little facade that's on the front of the triple deckers. And so that will look directly into my bathroom. Their fourth floor will look into my bathroom. Um, I also just think that there's now a new project on dot a for the Murphy's funeral home that's going to be coming
up with 22 units and that also is bigger um that this is bigger on a smaller side street than that is. And I I think with that open streets, the the widening the sidewalk, it just it doesn't fit the
size of the um the street and it'll affect our quality of life. Thank Okay. And next we have Jamal. You have 90 seconds. >> Serious allergic reactions may occur. Don't take it. Allergic to dextro.
>> Hello. Can I Hi. How you doing? Uh my name is Jamal Brisco Maxwell. I'm actually I live at 40 Ramsey Street. This new development is going to be built right in front of my home. Um, this this project is is going to be something that's going to change not
just the environment, but how we live on the street. Um, my parents bought this property in 1992. Uh, the majority of the people who live on the street, it has changed. But the thing about this is it's going to change for the worse. If you see if what Jessica said prior to me
coming on, there's another building that's going to be built around the corner. So, between these two projects, it's going to change things drastically. This is not what we're looking for in terms of a community. We're looking for something a little bit more um community or uh oriented. Um I'm I'm not opposed
to them having a building, but 22 units, no, maybe 6 to nine units. Um there's other developments that has happened around the street and there uh I think the highest is maybe 12 units and those haven't they've impacted the street, but not to the extent where where these
will. Um again, I strongly oppose this. I don't want this to come and be built like how they're going to be building it because again that will change everything for my neighborhood. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Next we have the person with the corner
>> and the red 90 seconds. >> Uh thank you. Uh good morning uh madam chair members of the board. Anthony Gelardi from city council her Murphy's office. The council would like to go on record in support of the application. Thank you. >> Okay. And next we have Steven Harvey.
You have 90 seconds. >> Mr. Harvey, since I'm I'm guessing you're the one who uh project managed this. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Could you please talk about the community process because uh you know there are clearly director Butters and organizations here not in support. So
I'd like to understand that process how that went. >> Yes ma'am. No, the project was filed on September 20th, 2024, and we had two public meetings. Um, and the project was approved on July 17, 2025. Uh, the
project was had originally uh been proposed as one building, but after the first meeting, um the community um very much uh wanted asked for a couple of things. one to preserve Ramsey Street or Ramsey Place and to um add um uh home
ownership to the proposal. So, um working with the proponent, we revised the project midway through um the article 80 process to meet the request of the community, maintaining Romney Place and providing both a rental and um
home ownership um um structures on the site. Um once that process was completed, we brought it to the board. Um it met the standards of the planning department and uh we feel the project is appropriate for the site. >> Thank you. Any other raised hands?
>> Yes, madame chair. We have more five people in the attendee section. Um >> okay, let's get through as many as we can. >> Okay, so next we have Rosner. Cindy, you have 30 seconds. >> Yes. Good morning. Um, I hope you can
hear me properly. I'm a direct voter on Sagamore Street and I am in favor of this proposal. Uh, it will look over my backyard which is not going to be an issue for me. I think the process has
been transparent. Uh the meetings that I attended at the property were civil and they were polite and they were uh very encouraging to people to speak their minds and give their feedback. Um I
cooperate. They cooperate with the neighborhood. They've changed when changes have been asked for. Uh what's currently there is just an eyesore. It's trash fil. There's these falling down buildings. Uh it's not great for the
neighborhood and 22 units, 11 parking spaces, home ownership, affordability, rental units. They've done what we've asked them to take a look at. So as a direct butter, I am firmly in favor of this proposal. Thank you for your time.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Next, we have a Chris Christine Ho. >> Yes. side. Thank you so much. Um my name is Christine Hogue. I'm um planning chair of Columbia Savin Hill Civic
Association. Um and while both the proponent and the architect are um respected members of our community, we did vote to oppose this project. Um we are in support of
housing. We are in support of home ownership. We are especially in support of affordable housing, but this particular project on this particular street we believe is too large and too big an ask for the utters. It is a
narrow um street and while we do appreciate how well the community um and the developers have worked together, we feel very strongly that this project uh should be smaller in scale. Um and um
perhaps something this size should be relocated to a project uh somewhere on a busy street which we do support like on Dorchester Avenue, Columbia Road, Morsy Boulevard um um the site of other large projects which we have voted to approve for the support. Um thank you very much
for your time. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Next we have the person with um iPhone. If you can say your name and address, please. You have 90 seconds.
>> My My name is N and my address at 411 Adam Street. You're just a mass 02122. I need to remove the proposal to to have the CO for my store.
>> Okay. You're we're not on your case. So, please wait your turn. Thank you. >> Sorry. Thank you. >> Oh, please continue. >> Okay. The next is Matthew.
If you can state your name and address and 90 seconds, please. >> Hi, good morning. My name is Matt Rabina. I'm in a butter at 37 Belffort Street. Um, my office window is looking directly at the site right now. Um, I strongly support this proposal. I do think that this is the right amount of
density for the site. Um, this isn't like any of the other lots on Ramsey Street. It's a super deep lot. It covers a lot of areas over half an acre. Um, I think the fact that the developers proposing so much off- streetet parking is really a benefit. And I say this as someone who doesn't have off- streetet
parking and and has to look for on street parking. There's parking in our neighborhood. I know, you know, folks might be frustrated it's not right in front of their house, but it it works. Um, I think the kind of like this townhouse concept and using the length and the depth of the site is really great. There's been some other really
good buildings put up on Pearl Street on Sabin Hill AB that look very similar to this in terms of how it's laid out. Um, and I think it's going to be really successful. The board um is able to approve it and I'm strongly in support of having this right in my backyard.
>> Thank you. Any other questions from the board? Is there a motion? >> I didn't speak yet. Am I not allowed to? >> I'm sorry. I did not see your hand raised. Are you speaking on this project? >> Yep. I I put my hand up and messaged in
the group there. Um if if I can go now if you want me to. It's up to you. >> Yes. Briefly. >> Yeah, I'll be super quick. Uh I'm an owner at 3327 Hill A. Um I echo a lot of what Matthew just said. Actually, I'm a big supporter of the lots an eyesore at the the moment and it's a big lot. I
like that they've come down overall in unit size. is I like that it's a mix of rental uh and for sale units with a lot of affordable units and green space as well. Um and they've been kind of consistently revising based on the
feedback in the community. And then uh one last thing I will say is um this crew actually built directly next to me um at my at 3327 Hill home and redevelop the land there and like we're awesome about it. Um, I originally lived in
South Boston and dealt with a lot of people who are not that way. It was a completely different experience going through the building uh and development process with this crew that's looking to build this and that. Um, yeah. So, I'm I'm very much so strongly in support. Thanks for your time. >> Thank you. Any other questions from the
board? >> Madam Chair, can I just address some of those comments just quickly? >> Yes. >> Hello. >> Hello. >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> Hello. Can you see me or hear me? >> Okay. Last last comment. Please state your name and address for the record and if you're in support or opposition.
iPhone. >> Okay. >> iPhone with raised hand. >> Okay. Please proceed, Mr. Gini. >> Sure. >> Um I just want to say >> this. Can someone hear me? I'm so sorry. This is Jeannie Gould. Can anyone hear me? I'm very sorry. I don't know how.
>> Okay. La Okay. La last comment, Miss >> I'm so sorry. Sorry, I don't know how to do this. Bear bear with me. So, my name is Jeannie Gould. I live and that was my brother, I think, trying to get on and so I'll speak on his behalf. We all live or I live at 36-38 Ramsey Street,
directly across from the Rice Post. And we vehemly oppose the size of this project. We're not opposed to working with the developers. And I'm I'm kind of upset with Steven Harvey because we all went every Abutter went to all those meetings and the director Butters, not
anyone who was, you know, inadvertently affected, but director Butters all said the same thing. It is way too big. There's not enough parking and the infrastructure on our street will be drastically changed. It's a residential side street. It's primarily owner occupied. Our family has owned that home
for 62 years. My dad is 96. He looks out that window at the Rice Post every day. We love our neighborhood and we would love to see things there. People say it's an eyes saw. Number one, that rice post, I could show you a picture. It looks exactly the same as it did when I was a little girl. If there's any eyes
saw there from trash or things, you should take that up with the current owners. They could be cleaning that up while they own it. That has nothing to do with what that looks like. That's on the current owners. And even the two family, my brother lived at 29 Ramsey Street for 20some years and he was
displaced because he couldn't afford to buy that. You talk about affordability, that is not affordable. James explained or someone there said a one-bedroom affordability is $2,300. My children, my nieces, they all work. They're school teachers. They they work
have great jobs. None of them can afford an apartment across the street. We joke and say you had to move to Hyde Park. You had to move here. We strongly oppose this. We would still work with the developers. We just want size. >> Thank you. >> Okay, Mr. Proini. Sorry. Um, thank you,
Madam Chair. I just want to say this proposal went through significant design changes based upon the feedback from the community. Originally, as Steven said, it was uh a single building that created a street wall of 35 units that didn't fit the context. So, it was revised to two smaller buildings, which as you will
see in the BPD recommendation, fits the neighborhood context. This development checks all the boxes for sensible development. It's a transitoriented development only a half a mile from both the Savil and JFK train stations. Nearly half the site remains open space. Home
owners ownership opportunity which is a dire need in this area and most importantly deeply affordable housing with absolutely no displacement. Thank you. We appreciate the opportunity. >> Thank you. Are there any other questions from the board? May I have a motion?
Madam Chair, I would like to make a motion of approval with planning department reviewing the 40% um affordable units that will be provided at this site. >> Thank you. >> Third absurd.
>> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Stebridge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia. >> Yes. Thank you for listening to us. Miss Turner.
>> Yes. >> The fix. >> Is this kindly >> Can you kindly mute folks who are not presenting or >> No, I won't. >> Mr. Langum, >> no.
>> Mr. Collins? >> Yes. >> Miss Bonado? Yes, >> the chair votes yes. The motion carries. >> Thank you everybody. Enjoy your holidays. >> Next we have case BA
1787087 with the address of 14 Westam Street. If the applicants and or they represent the president, would they please the case? >> Yes. Good morning, Mr. Secretary. Good morning, Madame Chair, members of the
board, Joseph Faster from the law firm of Dane Torpy, 175 Federal Street in Boston. Knowing that you uh want to move this along, I wanted to first uh begin by wishing all on this call, and primarily the board
members for sure, happy holidays, whatever holiday one celebrates, Christmas, um Hanukkah, or Quanza. Uh I do represent the developer in this case and I want to thank the mayor's office of neighborhood services for providing the opportunity for us to
meet with the community in uh very significantly just to speak briefly about the project and madam chair will only be two other individuals who will speak. One will be Nera Burrell and the other will be Dave Saladic who is from
the mass uh design group who will explain the project in great detail. But I wanted to give a sense of this meeting. There was an ext u ext extensive community process that has gone on over a long period of time and I'll have ner talk about the process
which even preceded the current uh proposal that's before the board. Uh this is going to be a two-story u uh building for a birthing center. It will have its uh building that will have six 6,800 square ft. Uh it will have off
streetet parking and it will have a um open space and all of this will be going in. You don't need to move the plans. I'm not going to do the plans. I'm going to leave that for the other uh for the um architect to do that. Um there has been extensive support for this project
and certainly you will hear some opposition members of the board. uh but uh we have uh submitted extensive letters of support from a butters from neighborhood from community with regards
to this project. So with that as a backdrop I'd like uh Miss Buril Mira Buril to tell you about what the birthing center will be and then Dave Saladic to take you through the plans. Sure. I appreciate it and and I know
you're going to do this anyway, but you know, we do have uh you know, some board members heard you the prior time, some were not sitting and so if you could just make sure you're explaining changes from your last presentation, that would just be great. Like, you know, things that have gone down in size, etc. Thank
you. >> Uh good morning, Madame Chair, members of the board. Uh my name is David Saledic. I'm going to go into to some of that right now. I'm an architect with Mass. were leading the redesign at 14 Win3 Street. So, I'm going to start by recapping uh where we've been. Uh we've
shared a slide deck. Would it be possible to uh share that on the screen rather than the the plans? Does the ambassador have the other plan the slide that they're referring to? There you go.
>> Is that what you're looking for? >> Uh, yes. Thanks so much. Yeah, that'll that'll help illustrate the changes that we've made. So, if we could go to slide slide two, please. Um, some of you may remember in 2023, um, initial designs for a larger 20,000 square foot project
were shared in a neighborhood meeting. community feedback uh was that that project was too large. Um we agreed and as a result one of the core project partners relocated reducing the scale of the project uh to around 11,000 square ft. And this proposal was the one that
we brought uh before the ZBA back in February of this year. Um today we return to you with an even smaller building approximately 6,800 square ft and containing only the birth center. There are no additional partners in the
project, no office space, uh no gathering spaces, uh and community uh shared space has been removed. We've also increased uh the parking count from 11 to 14 spaces per community feedback which adequately accounts uh for staff
and patients of a birthing center of this size. Um, lastly, just as a reminder to the board, the existing red house at 14 Winthre Street, where we are proposing our development, um, has had a notice to demolish since 2019.
Um, if you could stay on that slide, please, the slide above. So, just to compare uh the if you could go to the previous slide, please, just to compare the the 2024 design with where we are today, um, our design is on the right.
And again, we've reduced the total number of lots in the project from four to three. The proposal now includes only the three parcels at 10, 14, and 18 Winthrup Street. We have excluded the parcel and house at 23 Karav, which is
visible in the background of this image here, and that will remain as a residential property as previously requested by the community. We've reduced the total built area of the project from 10,500 square ft to 6,800 ft² as as we said while maintaining two
stories in height. We've increased the percentage of non-built area on the property and again increased uh the number of parking stalls from 11 to 14. So all these changes um have happened over the last few months. They've resulted in a smaller building, more open space and also less foot and car
traffic than the previous design. Um next slide please. Uh if we look at the interior layout of the birth center, we've re remained consistent with the previous versions. So we still have a total of four birth suites and four exam rooms. The only
difference here is that previously uh these were all on the ground floor that's shown on the left and the current design on the right uh has uh these spaces split across two floors. Next slide please. Um, through it all, I think we've remained committed to
designing a birth center that in its essence is residential in nature and fits the scale and character of the neighborhood. Next slide. Um, zooming into the ground floor plan, the main parking and building entrances will be located on Winthre Street. Um,
as you enter through a small lobby, you come into a family room with a kitchen and a salarium. Toward the back of the site, there are four private birth suites that connect directly to the labor garden located in the upper uh left corner of the property. People will labor, birth, and recover postpartum in
in those birth suites. And along the south boundary of the property, as shown in this plan, the parking lot will align with the building's south facade. We're maintaining an 8'4 in stepback uh that's consistent with the existing context and street wall of adjacent properties. Um
and the parking of course will be screened with a fence and vegetation to reduce visual impact to the street. Next slide. Um upstairs on the upper floor, the second floor is an extension of the birth center functions. We have a reception space and and several exam
rooms uh located at the front of the building as well as uh staff space for birth center staff at the back. Next slide. Um, this is a rendering that shows how it feels to approach the building coming from Winthre Street. Bur
Center is a really homelike facilities. So, this two-story building has an intent has been intentionally designed to maintain a residential character rather than an institutional look. And our goal has always been uh to to design something that really feels like home.
Next slide. At the back of the property, um those birth suites that I mentioned open up onto a private labor garden that brings light and nature into the rooms and that gives people a quiet private space to uh connect with the outdoors during labor and during the immediate
postpartum period. Next slide. This will be my uh last slide, I believe. So, this last image conveys uh the homelike environment that's proposed for the interiors. This rendering in particular corresponds to the family room at the ground floor where loved ones will
gather uh when relatives are admitted in labor. You'll families will be able to sit and relax in this lounge area, get sun in the salarium which you can see through the windows or heat up meals in in the kitchen to the left. All in a place that feels more like a living room than a hospital waiting room. Um and
with that I will pass it uh to Nashira. Um, apologies. I'll pass it to attorney Feaster. >> Thank you very much, uh, David for that presentation. The sharer would have talked about what the birthing center is, but I think, madame chair, that the board has
sufficient information with regards to what will be uh, provided at the birthing center. You can see that um my client has had extensive conversation and took into account much of what the community has raised uh and try to
address that and has reduced the project in size created additional open space has maintained a building that that can be used for residential use has increased the off street parking so I think they have been receptive. So with
that, I turn it to you, Madam Chair, um in order for you to deal with the Q&A. Thank you. >> Actually, sorry, Attorney Fer Dave and I just um flipped order. So I do have a few things I'd like to share about the birth center before we turn it back to the board if that's okay.
>> Sorry about that, Madam Chair. Very briefly sharer, please. >> Very briefly. Can I have the slides back? That would be great. I'll be very brief. Thank you. We'll go right to after where Dave was. There's a community context slide on number 12. Thank you. Yes. So, as attorney Feer said, my name is
Nishira Burl. I'm the director of the neighborhood birth center. Um, and for those members of the board who did not meet us in February, I want to briefly just talk about why having a birth center is important to Boston, but also why this site is in particular uh key to our success. Um, we first began with
negotiating an emergency transfer agreement with Boston Medical Center. And then we looked for property. It was really important to find property that was just a few minutes transferred to BMC as well as Longwood. Um, and that allowed us to create a neighborhood based sanctuary for low-risk uh birth and care. This is really a third option
between hospital and home birth. And the key word being sanctuary. So, we purposefully chose residential property confident that we could amass the overwhelming support that we have. Next slide. I'll skip the next one. We've talked a little bit about our process
and you can skip that one as well. One more. We'll just I'm just catching up making up time here. This one's great. Why are what are birth centers? So, a birth center is a homelike facility. It's staffed by midwives. Oh, one one above that. They provide physiologic or natural child birth and
gyn care. They offer longer, more personalized visits. Birth centers have relationships with hospitals for seamless access to physician or hospital care when needed. This will not be a cash pay facility as some birth centers are. We will accept commercial insurance and have planned for more than 60% mass
health in our business plan. Um, birth centers are associated with better experiences and better outcomes including lower pre-term births, lower cesarian rates, and lower rates of low birth weight. And there's data on that slide above if the board has the has the slides after. Um, and this is just a
context of the the the nation. Uh, there are a number of birth centers um popping up across the country, more than 300 now. Uh, next slide. There's only one in Massachusetts. It's out in um Florence in the Northampton area, which really underscores the local need. The other
birth centers in the Boston area have closed in the last 5 years. Next slide. Next slide. We can even go one more. This just shows you the closures and those that are in development. And I'll end on this. Oh, one more. My
most important slide is just above this. Thank you. Um, last time around it was suggested to a commercial property, you know, somewhere down on Washington Street or Melania Cass. And if I can leave you with one thing today as you head into your decision, uh, I hope that it's this
that across the country, midwives catch babies in houses and birth centers just like this. What we're talking about is a four-bedroom home that looks like a home and feels like a home and has a um, luxurious green space. It's staffed by midwives where people can come for affirming and life-saving care. It is
not a hospital. It is not a community health center, but it does need clinical use. From Tallahassee to Western Mass, birth centers operate in homes that have been renovated or in new builds um designed to replicate a two-story home like the one we're proposing here.
>> Thank you. >> Are there questions from the board? Okay. Hearing none, may I have public testimony? And just a reminder, we are limiting public testimony to 90 seconds. Madam chair and members of the board, for the record, my name is Jeremy Beery.
I'm the Roxbury community engagement specialist for the Office of Neighborhood Services. The applicant has completed the community process which consisted of an Abuers meeting facilitated on October 15th that was very well attended. The meeting was split between those who opposed and those who supported. Supporters were delighted to see the developers respond
to the prior community feedback and significantly reduce the size of the proposal to benefit within the character of the neighborhood. Supporters felt the birthing center would be a place for women of all ages to come and work together while adjusting the need for better healthcare for minority women and infants during pregnancy. The opposed,
many from Winthrop Street, cited the current zoning of the residential parcel, voicing their opposition to providing a variance for the forbidden use of a clinic in a residential neighborhood. And Abu was adamant the neighborhood is not opposed to a birthing center, but rather opposed to changing the zoning and building a commercial development in their
neighborhood they feel should remain solely for their residential use. Next, the proponent presented to Roxberry path forward on November 18th where the civic remained opposed to the proposal as it does not address Roxberry's urgent need for housing. The proposal surrounded by residences would damage the residential
character of the neighborhood and narrow street and therefore the civic urges the board to deny the variance for use. To date for opposition, our office has received 93 letters of opposition, including one from Roxberry Path Forward, maintaining the opposed theme of forbidden commercial use and residential zone and from Roxbury
neighborhood council pointing out the physical constraints of the proposed location and how they pose significant risk for laboring patients, emergency responders, and the broader community within the birthing center being located on Winthre Street, a one-way single lane residential street that outlets directly onto Warren Street, a highly trafficked
arterial corridor, and urges the city to prioritize maternal and neonatal safety, emergency responsiveness, and neighborhood impact in its review of the proposal. To date, for support, our office has received 215 individual letters of support and 218 signature
online petition of support and 23 letters of support from organizations and government officials. I will read a few into record as they have been sent to the board for their review. Supporting officials include United States Representative Ayanna Presley, Massachusetts State Senator Liz Miranda, Massachusetts State Representative
Christopher Warel, City Councelor at Large Julia Mahia, Councelor Pepin, Dr. Ela Fitzgerald Lewis, Director of the Bureau of Family Health and Nutrition of the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, and the state maternal and child health director, child services in Roxbury and Embrace Boston. At this
time, the mayor's office of neighborhood services would like to go on record in support of this proposal. Thank you for your time. Mr. Bry, can I ask you a quick question? Yes. The letters of the the letters of opposition, were they based on the original project or what we
see in front of us or do you not know? >> Uh, yes, ma'am. I did read through them. Uh, we have 62 letters uh that were uh physical uh letters uh and the other were sent in uh via uh email. I can read uh over the uh
>> yeah my question was just whether they're based on the revisions that were presented today or were they from the the previous >> they are new yes ma'am they are new uh opposition letters uh regarding the again the uh the uh location and the uh building of commercial property the
variance uh for the usage >> thank you >> yes ma'am is >> okay next we have a a pis you have 90 Yeah, my name is Jesse Pervvis, um the director of policy for Council President
Lu Jian, and we'd like to go on record in support of the proposal. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Next, we have Lorine, Lorine Payne. >> Good morning. Um I am on the call today um representing Broxbury Path Forward uh
Neighborhood Association. My address is on Morland Street, the next street over from uh Winth Street and in referring to the letters um they are by and large from people who live on Winthrop Street.
And um I you know I live in this neighborhood because I bought my house from my family members. And again many of the houses that are across from the birthing center are people who could be the third generation in their home going
back to when this neighborhood was segregated. And um what I want to emphasize for you is that this project does not meet the conditions in article 7 that are required for a variance.
There are no special circumstances applying to this land. This is just something that they want. And because Winth Street, including Warren Street, um the laundromat next door, which has
been referred to, has been sold for housing. This is a a national historic district that primarily is made up of housing. And if you approve this, even though it's a forbidden use, it will be
housing surrounding this commercial use. And um it it's it interferes with the neighborhood's quiet enjoyment wrap up ma'am property. Yes. >> Thank you ma'am. >> Thank you.
>> Okay. Next we have Brian. >> Good afternoon. Uh good morning madam chair, members of the board. Timothy Geon from uh city councelor Brian Warell's office. Uh we would just like to go on record in support of this project. Thank you very much.
>> Thank you. Next we have Maxine. >> Good morning. Thank you. I just want to actually um release some of my time to Lorraine so she can finish if that's okay. But I live on Montro Street um not too far from there and I oppose the project
for the same reasons that zoning needs to maintain residential so that we can have more affordable home ownership for the community. Um as this is a forbidden use and um I vehematly oppose it. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
Next we have Rachel. Rashelle. >> Good morning madam chair and members of the board. My name is Michelle Centeo and I'm here on behalf of state senator Liz Miranda who represents the second Suffach district and strongly supports the neighborhood bird center proposed at 14 Winthrup Street. We recognize the
land use decision can raise real and heartfelt concerns and we want to acknowledge the community members that have shown up today. What is important for the board to know is that this proposal has been meaningfully changed since it last came before you specifically in response to those concerns. The current plan represents a significantly scaled down project. The
building footprint has been reduced nearly three times um the size that it initially was proposed. Um the project is now only a bird center. There are no additional nonprofit offices or gathering spaces, which means less foot traffic and fewer daily trips. Senator Miranda's support for this project is
grounded in both local need and state policy. Last year, she helped pass a comprehensive maternal health omnibus bill aimed at improving birth outcomes across Massachusetts, particularly for communities that experience the highest rate of maternal morbidity and mortality. This legislation recognizes what the data makes clear. We must
expand access to safe, culturally responsive, and community-based birthing options alongside hospital care. The neighborhood birth center directly advances the goals of that legislation. Birth centers are proven to are proven to improve outcomes, reduce unnecessary interventions, and provide family
centered care, especially for black birthing people who continue to face unacceptable disparities in maternal health. The request for clinical use variance does not threaten the neighborhood with commercial reasonzoning. It's a small homelike facility thoughtfully redesigned to fit its surrounding while meeting. Senator
Miranda urg urgently um respectfully urges the board to review this application through both public health lens. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next we have is Sheriff. >> Hi Cheryl Spence. I live at 33 Mroom Street, unit number three. Um I'm
opposed to the birthing center. I would just like to say that uh as as in the contrary to what Joe Fester says, we didn't ask for more parking. We didn't ask for outdoor space and we didn't ask for a smaller footprint. It's still a
commercial space in a residential area. Um there's no reason that it should be approved. It was it was denied the last time. Um also, I feel that the presentations shouldn't be about a birthing center. It should be about
zoning and I have not heard anyone from the proponent speak about zoning. >> Um, >> also I would like to say that Representative Warell and Miranda do not represent that neighborhood. So what
they want should go into their neighborhood. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right. Next we have a Sophia. >> Thank you. Good morning, members of the zoning board of appeals. My name is Sophia Abdi. I serve as the senior
community engagement manager for Congresswoman Ayanna Presley. I am here on on behalf of Congresswoman Presley in support of the neighborhood birth cent's proposed project. Boston families deserve access to safe, culturally responsive, and community centered
maternity care. This project advances that critical goal. For far too long, black and brown birthing people have faced disparities in access outcomes and experience experiences within our health care system. Community-based midwife
care offers an affirming alternative that centers dignity, choice, and trust. Approving this project will help ensure more families can give birth in an environment that supports their health, autonomy, and well-being while also
ensuring um public health strengthening public health and advancing racial equity. Um with that, Congresswoman Presley respectfully urged the board to approve this project. Thank you for your time and consideration. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. Uh um I'm sorry. I think the person for iPhone 8. >> Yes. Thank you. Um good morning, madam chair, members of the board. Anthony Gerardy from the city council and Eron Murphy's office. The council would like to go on record as being opposed to this
project. Thank you. >> And we're going to try to get through as many as possible. So if folks can just briefly state their support or opposition, that would help us get through everyone. >> All right. So, we are going to the attendee section. Um, we're going to
start with Denise Malice. You have no seconds. Neighbors, please. >> Um, my name's Denise Malice. Thank you for um letting me speak. I live at 16 Morland Street and am considered uh and a butter. I oppose this. Stand with uh
the neighborhood in opposing this. Um this is a David and Goliath situation. we do not have the voice and the political reach that uh the birthing center has and so it diminishes our vote. Um I am opposed to this because
this is still three parcels of residential land not just one but three. Okay, there's going to be a housing on CR but that is not that is just to allow this to to seem different. Um, I would
like to say that uh that Roxbury Neighborhood Council doesn't support it. And um I would also like to say in meetings the lawyer that represents the birthing center could not tolerate any negative feedback. Continuously cut us
off and belittled our opinions. That meter that meeting had only opposition. Nobody spoke that was for it. So, um I hope that you can hear our voice and uh consider that we are against the zoning
and not the commercialization of this neighborhood. It's commercial. >> Thank you. >> I'm going to I'm going to ask folks to to speak quicker if you we want to hear everyone because we do have 20 cases after this. Thank you.
>> Okay. Uh next we have Garrison Tro. >> Oh, that's right. Um Connie Ford representing Roxbury neighborhood council. Um the neighborhood council we support expanded community based maternity care and respect the role presenting birth centers play for low risk pregnancies. However, our concern
is not the model of care but whether this specific location can safely support laboring mothers in emergency response within minutes when it really matters. Win Street is a one-way single lane residential street. It's ending up on Warland Street which has a traffic
light. um very shortly away from where the street the mouth of the street is. And then if you're trying to go to Boston Medical Center and you're going to the next flight which is off of um at that point Studley Street, it's dangerous when you have a if you have an emergency either coming to the birthing
center or leaving from the birthing center. That does not accommodate the need for a safe transportation. Yes, birth center saves lives, but we're not talking about the birthing center specifically. We talk about the lives of people who would need to access that space in this location is not a safe
place and the emergency vehicles that have to access it. The street already has reported that cars reverse drive the wrong way on the street and that has not been addressed and we need to have the the health and welfare of our parents,
the mother and the child is a priority and not the political appropriateness of a neighborhood birthing center that needs to be removed. It's a safety matter. Thank you. >> Thank you. Okay, next we have a cartto.
So in the interest of time I think we can take about five more people. So I would encourage folks to also put their feedback in the chat. >> Good morning call to disco speaking. I live at 60 Winthre Street. I've been a
longtime resident. I am opposed to the project. It's because it it is changing zoning from residential to commercial. And I'm very afraid that if this board
looks at it and lets it change, that's going to set a precedent in our neighborhood that housing is needed and we don't need commercial in the neighborhood when all the major boulevards have commercial that are
surrounding us. And we're not against the birthing center. We're against it being in the wrong place. >> That's all. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Uh, next we have I think somebody from the electro official repa
Tyler. >> Hi. Yes. Rep Tyler, I'm here. Can you hear me? >> Yes, ma'am. >> Hi. Yes. Uh, good morning everyone. Um, thank you so much for taking me out of turn. Um, I'll keep my remarks short and um, I really appreciate being on and I
just think that at this time um, based off of my research and just hearing and doing my best to reach out to um, both the neighborhood of Butters as well as the entity looking to be able to bring forth this birthing center in Rockbury that a ton of more work needs to be done
in making this possible. Um I was able to speak to the birthing center leadership team and was able to present some other ideas. Um and I just again think that there are other ideas and other you know other things that we can bring about to be able to have a the best partnership with the birthing
center uh coalition. Um you guys are aware that the Boston Foundation just came out with a recent u report on housing 2025 here for the city of Boston and it really speaks a lot towards a lot needs to be done as it relates to housing. And so I hear a lot of
constituents being concerned about, you know, what could potentially be done with housing in this area and why they're pushing back on making this a commercial space rather than it being a housing um zone for housing, which it is now. Um and again, I just think that a lot of work just needs to be done around this conversation and more innovative
ideas need to be put forth. Um so, thank you so much for having me. Um and I look forward to continuing this conversation. will be happy to come back if they're offered another opportunity to work with neighbors to make it work for everyone. But I just think that more work needs to be done here.
>> So for having me and >> Okay. Uh and next one second my computer is frozen. Okay. Uh, Marilyn Mariel I think it's Mariel D.
I'm sorry. >> Marie Lint Marie Linton. >> Yes. >> Can you unmute yourself? >> Okay. >> Okay. We have a few more hands and you know we have you were a few >> I understand that but you've let
everybody else >> I'm testifying on behalf of the neighborhood birth center proposed location on Winthrop Street. I've lived on Montro Street for the past 51 years and I'm a member of the historic Morland Street neighborhood association another
community organization which includes Winthrop Morland Fairland Copeland Dunre and Whiting Streets. I have consistently supported and been attending the birth center groups meeting at community locations for the past four years. The
need for a birth center in Roxbury is self-evident. The maternal mortality rate for black women in the US is 3.5 times higher than those of white women. The birthing centers offers midwives and dualists who will provide quality pre um
prenatal and postpartum depression care in a personalized and supportive environment. The proposed birth center has a welcoming design and is within the 10mi radius of BMC should emergency care be needed. Our community has evidenced
the support for this uh project by attending meetings and uh providing written documentation. It's also uh the worthwhile effort which is is it's a worthwhile effort which is also supported by elected officials as you've heard including the governor who
supported a million dollar grant in October 24 for the development of three birthing centers in Worcester, Northampton and Boston. This should not this project should not be abandoned because of uh misguided fears over
possible commercialization. >> All right. Um we have eight like nine more people. Um >> well we we can do as many as we can. We can't I don't think we can do all of them. So N I think had her hand up as in a butter. I I would like to hear from
dire Butters. If you're not a director Butter, can you lower your hand? >> Okay. Okay. I have Glenn Lloyd. >> Great. Thank you. Um, so I'm a resident at homeowner 15 Street and I'm in
support of this project. I'll start with three point quick points. I have a personal experience. My oldest daughter, uh, I drove my wife to the Cambridge Birth Center. Took her 30 minutes and it resulted in a beautiful water birth which was magical. So I know the power of the birth centers. Personally, I've
witnessed the team here at the neighborhood burst center over the last few years be thoughtful and have listened and most importantly adjusted uh uh you know one being the size of the space and now preserving the home at 23 Kursarge providing a residential scale looks like and feels like a home which
is what we're talking about in this community like how do we get more residential feel um and for someone who lives right here um I've seen the proliferation of highcost condos and luxury apartments changing the fabric of our community this is a chance for a local black nonprofit doing amazing work
to set roots, an important legacy for the neighborhood, helping maintaining cultural diversity, uh, which we treasure here. I'll hand my time back over. >> Thank you. >> Um, we have
I think they're about I'm sorry. I'm trying to catch up with the message and the people who are raising the hand. pitches number two. >> Yes. Um, >> you have 90 seconds, please.
>> Can you state your name and address for the record and whether you're in support or opposition? >> Yes. Good morning. My name is Dette Bob. I live on 313 Street. I'm a direct at Butter. I strongly, wholeheartly support the neighborhood birthing center. I feel
that Roxberry being that Roxberry has the highest um poor birth rate. I feel that the neighborhood birthing center has a strong mission, a unique mission to support women um delivering healthy
babies and I humbly ask the board to support the neighborhood birthing center on the street. Thank you. >> Thank you. I'm going to encourage folks to put your your feedback in the chat. We we do have to wrap up. We'll take one
more. Um Jesus, can you can you pick Naen Riggs? I guess her hand has been up a while. >> All right. Uh I'm I'm sorry. >> The next person that I see is Sophia Perez. >> Good morning. Thank you, Madam Chair,
members of the board. Um, I'm a direct butter at 15 North Street and I go on the record opposing this project due to the concerns about zoning. Um, if you look at the plot and this neighborhood, you'll see that it's not a cozy homey neighborhood as shown
>> in the um uh slides, but it's already an area at risk of commercial encroachment. And I want to be clear that commercial encroachment is gentrification, which is not culturally responsive or uh safe for our neighborhood. Um, I'll add more in the chat. I also want to second what Denise said about the treatment of the
opposition. We have been undermined and treated uh as ignorant or misguided. And I really want to be clear that we deserve um respect and uh safe place to live and not as misguided or misunderstanding or people who don't
care about black and brown birthing people's safety or rights. We do, but this is not the appropriate location for it for many of the reasons listed. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay, Madame Chair. Uh there is one
person on the panelist section Nomi. Uh I'm not sure if you're a an oral for a an elected official office. >> I'm not a director. I'm a Roxberry resident, but I'll just go on the record
and state my support for this project. >> Thank you. So for the remaining hands, can I ask you if we go through all of you, can you just state whether you're in support or opposition? We've heard many reasons. So I think we can uh you know, we we can
gather insight into that. So just if you're in support or opposition, Jesus. >> All right. Okay. So next in the order we have great Jane Jenny. >> Keep going.
>> Okay. If not we have uh >> Oh, I'm here. I'm >> I'm sorry I didn't unmute. Uh that's Greg Janie neighbor. Good morning madam chair members board. I'm in full support of this project. I'm sitting here with the and a butter child justice who lives
on street that would also like to provide testimony. >> Yes. Uh, child Justice. Good morning, everyone. Um, I'm in full support of this project. I like to add that there has been a clinic on that street before and for everyone who's been there for a
while should know of this. Um, I think it helps the community and I am in full support. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh, okay. Next we have Aldos.
Hi, my name is Aldo. I live on 15 Winthub Street >> Street. Uh, and I strongly oppose this project. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Okay. Next, we have
uh the the phone number we 719316. >> Keep calling. >> Okay. >> We need to wrap this up. Next we have Tara registered kuri. >> Hi good morning. I am in a butter at 22
Winthre Street and I strongly support this project. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Next we have Marit Bale. >> Yes. Hi. Um I live at 43 Winthrop Street and I strongly oppose this po project. I
think that it is a red herring with >> Please keep going. just your name and address and support or opposition. That's it. >> Next, we have Nadine Riggs. >> Hello, this is Naen Riggs at 43 Winth Street. I have Mary Jane who is the
director of butter and another butter here to speak. I am opposed of this project and it comes down to this is not this is a zoning issue. It is not a healthc care debate. We have a right to keep our area as residential. And my
biggest concern here is if this project, it's not if this it's not about if and when this project leaves that space. It's about what happens if they're allowed to go here. Because if they're if they're allowed to to have this project, it's opens the door for anyone
else who can come in, buy a building, tear it down, and put in commercial. It's not fair. I >> Thank you. All right. Um I have direct >> I don't know if the um applicant wishes to briefly address
these butter concerns. >> Um there are two people. I hope you >> I have asked as many people as I could. So I'm going to turn it back to the abutters and to the board members. Attorney Faster, I'll just
safy question. >> Yes. Um I I would like for you, Ner, but very very briefly, I think you have stated the case. I think uh Madame Chair, that the architect has done the design. I
recognize the opposition. Um um I'm I'm not going to address the comments with with regards to how I may have approached folks at that particular meeting. Obviously, I disagree with the interpretation, but that's okay. That's not the issue before the board. The
zoning here and the zoning that we have >> is on as um as well, it was not red. We had um off streetet parking, the use regulations and dimensional regulations and the uh the applicant has sought to
address the off streetet parking issue by increasing the number of parking spaces. the use. We understand that and this discussion as you know madam chair I represent a lot of uh clients throughout the entire city of Boston and these are the types of conversations
that do come up but I know through the wisdom of the board you look at these things from the standpoint of uh weighing all of the issues as it relates to whether variances would be granted and in this particular case I will argue that my client has addressed uh many of
the community concerns and discussion about this is a zoning issue and this is a commercial issue. My client's not proposing a commercial project. My client is pres uh presenting a wholesome environment for women to in a safe place
to be able to deliver their children and the issues about the access. Um I will last say I'm familiar with Winter Street. My wife grew up on Winter Street so I am familiar with it. So, I think that we've addressed it and I'm not sure that we need to add more to that. I leave it to the wisdom of the board.
>> Are there other questions from the board? >> I do have a question. >> Yes, sir. >> Is there a way if when if and when we vote on this, is there a way to pro do a provision so that if um ownership changes, they would have to come back um
that it can revert back to a residential and that whoever wants to build on this would have to come back to. >> Excellent question, Caroline. You could do a proviso that limits to this petitioner only. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Excellent question. Any other questions
from the board? May I have a motion? >> Yes. I'd like to put forward a motion of approval with proviso that this um commercial occupancy is only for this
applicant. And I'd also like to state first of all, thank you for the revisions that you made. I understand that you've greatly reduced your project um to fit into a more of a residential set setting. I also really appreciate you explaining that um a residential
setting is necessary to the mission of this project. Um and so with that, I put forward a motion of approval >> with the proviso to this applicant. Correct? >> Yes. >> Is there a second? Second,
>> Mr. Stanbridge. >> Yes. Mr. Valencia. >> Yes. >> Miss Turner. >> Yes. Mr. Langum. >> Mr. Langum. >> Yes. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Collins. You're on mute. Mr. Collins. >> Sorry. Yes. >> Miss Bonado. >> Yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. Thank you. >> Thank you very much, members of the
board. >> Thank you. Next case. >> Yes. Um since we've passed the 11:00 hour, Madam Chair, um we'll ask if there are any requests for withdrawals or deferrals from the
11:00 hearing. If not, then we will return to the 9:30 hearing and we will go to case DOA 17600 09 with the address of 2A Rosmore Road. If
the applicants and or the representative are present, will they please explain the case to the board? Thomas Santan I think Santa Maria I'm sorry I'm not sure if you're speaking >> yeah you have me here >> yes
>> all right great uh so and I think Colleen is also present basically I bought this building last December uh and at the time it was rented to Boston's Boxer Club, which is the commercial space on the first floor. The
prior owner, when they bought the building and did their renovation project, were hoping to maintain the building as a uh restaurant. So, it was so they had a temporary uh certificate of occupancy as
a bar, tavern, and two residential units. We are filing for an appeal to change that to two residential units and uh boxing gym or or gym. Um we've been
through the community processes. I'm pleased to report that they went well. Uh and uh I think that's really all I have to say. Oh, and and the point is that no, you know, no work was really uh done here. Uh the building was delivered to me or that first commercial well it
was delivered to the tenant the at the gym as a blank box and they did some paint put their equipment in and uh got on the you know got the road on the show. So uh that's I think really all I have to say here.
>> Thank you. Are there questions from the board? >> Hearing none. May I have public testimony? Madam chair and members of the board, for the record, my name is Jeremy Bey. I'm the Jamaica Plane community engagement specialist for the Office of Neighborhood Services. The applicant has completed the community process which consisted of a lightly
attended voters meeting facilitated on September 11th. Of the four voters, two had no concerns. One voiced support and the last voiced a few concerns regarding boys and I being casing a tree and the aesthetics of the exterior building pointing out the building often gets tagged with graffiti. Next opponent presented Jim McClain neighborhood
council where they've gained a vote of approval. Thank you for your time and the mayor's office of neighborhood services would like to defer to the board for their judgment. >> Thank you, >> Madame Chair. There are no additional comments >> that. May I have a motion?
>> Motion to approve. >> Is there a second? >> Mr. Ste? >> Yes. >> Mr. Vonia? >> Yes. >> Miss Turner? >> Yes. >> Mr. Langum? >> Yes. Mr. Collins,
>> yes. >> Miss Parado, >> yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. Good luck. >> Thank you all very much. >> Next, we have case BOA 1784709 with the address of 162 to 172 South
Street. If the applicant andor their representative is present, would they please explain the case to the board? Hi everyone. Uh, can you hear me? >> Yes, sir. >> Hi everyone. My name is Alexander G. Michelle and together with my brother Baris St. Julian, we're in the process
of opening AMG liquor store on 170 South Street in Jamaica Plane. We respectfully believe that our recent denial in our change of occupancy requests may have been made in error as our location is a part of an active commercial plaza with multiple established business operating
directly besides us on either side. several of whom who have shared that they have previously encountered similar misunderstandings regarding zoning. Our space itself was previously a hair salon. We have been diligently persevering
throughout challenges throughout this process, but the delay in approval has significantly hindered us in our ability to begin operations and move and move forward respectfully. Sorry. We truly appreciate your time and consideration and we hope our request encourages a closer look so that we can
begin contributing to this long-standing business community. And if you could go uh on to the third slide for me, please. Uh you'll see the storefront and the fact that it's a plaza and already in a
commercial um zone. Is the ambassador able to forward the slides as requested? >> Yes. Uh down one more please. Uh and now down to the last one if you could please. And that is all.
>> Okay. Are there questions from the board? >> Um yes, I do have a question. Are there other liquor stores um nearby? like where's the closest the next closest one? >> So, there is one about 500 yards away. It's um Happy Market. Um but they aren't
a dedicated liquor store. They do sell liquor, but they are technically a grocery store. They don't advertise liquor outside. They don't uh deliver liquor or offer any memberships. >> Thank you. Are there others in the area besides Happy Market? >> Um maybe about a mile out or maybe eight
miles. Um there's Forest Hills Liquors uh on on the opposite side of us. And that's about it. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Other questions from the board? >> Does Mr. Hampton wish to comment on the
uh use issue? >> Thank you, Madam Chair, members of the board. Uh Jeff Hampton, uh PL City of Austin Planning Department. We're in support of this use. Uh but just for the record, that area, South Street, is all zone residential. There are commercial
uh uh pockets, especially in that section, and then uh I think one block up to the north, but it is residential. So the unfortunately for this applicant, the citation is correct. >> Thank you. With that, let's have public testimony. >> Madam Chair and members of the board,
for the record, my name is Jeremy Benbury. I'm the Jamaica Plane community engagement specialist for the Office of Neighborhood Services. The applicant has completed the community process which consisted of an abot meeting uh that was held on October 27th with one guest sitting. They were surprised to see the proposal back after 6 months because of a variance that was missed uh previously
on the application by both uh departments. The proposal was previously approved by the civic and not required to represent. Thank you for your time and the mayor's office of neighborhood services would like to defer to the board for their judgment. >> Thank you. >> Madame, there are no additional comments.
With that, may I have a motion? >> Motion to approve. >> Second. Is >> there a second? Mr. Stebridge? >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia? >> Yes. >> Miss Turner? >> Yes. >> Mr. Lion? >> Yes. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Collins? >> Yes. >> Miss Pado? >> Yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. Good luck. >> Thank you, board. Next we have case BOA 1765807 with the address of 764 764A
Truman Street. If the applicant andor their representative are present, will they please explain to the board? >> Call the court right away. >> Yeah. Can you hear me? >> Yes, we can. >> Okay. Um, we're just basically trying to
change the occupancy from, I believe it was zoned for a hair salon to a personal training studio. That is it. >> Are there any exterior changes? Just interior >> just and no interior changes at all. Like everything is already there's
nothing that needs to be done. Literally just change of occupancy. >> Questions from the board. >> May I have public testimony? >> Hello, Madam Chair, members of the board. My name is Eva Jones representing the mayor's office in neighborhood services regarding 7 regarding 764 to
764A Treemon Street. Our office defers to the board's judgment. A community process was conducted including a distribution of a subcommittee flyer on 101425 that did not generate any community feedback and the proposal was also reviewed by the Hurly Block Neighborhood Association at their
meeting on 91025. The association expressed support about the proposal and at this time the mayor's office of neighborhood services defers to the board's judgment on this matter. Thank you everyone for your time and consideration. >> Thank you madam. Madame chair there are no additional comments >> with that. May I have a motion?
>> Motion to approve. >> There a second. >> Yeah. >> Mr. Se. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia. >> Yes. >> Miss Turner. >> Yes. >> Mr. Langum. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Collins. >> Yes. Miss Palado, >> yes. >> Chair votes yes. Motion carries. >> Next we have case BOA 1777 6813 with the address of 70 Burbank Street.
If the applicants and their representative are present, would they please explain the case to the board? >> Yes. Uh good morning, Madame Chair, members of the board, attorney Nick Suzula, McDerman, Quilty, Miller, and Hanley, 28 State Street in Boston. If u
Mr. Ambassador or Madame Ambassador could pull up, we did have a brief presentation on this. Um you can go to the second slide, please, when you get there. Um, with me today from Fenway Community
Development Corporation, uh, now DBA Fenway Forward is Ari Sugarman, who's the real estate project manager for Fenway Forward, and Senife John, who's the deputy director and head of real estate. Uh, next slide, please.
So, the project uh is located uh at 64-70 Burbank Street. This is an existing 35,000q ft² mixeduse building uh in the Fenway. Uh the appellant actually owns the building, has its offices uh in the basement lower level.
Uh and there are uh many residential units above. And what's being proposed uh is to convert or expand approximately 188 square feet um of underutilized existing basement courtyard space into
conference uh/training space for the Fenway Forward staff and uh their community program. Uh next slide please. The zoning relief that's required for this is two things uh two items. First
is the GCOD is applicable. Uh we did submit the appropriate no harm letter in the BWSC compliance lettered to the board and to uh Mr. Simonelli at BGWT. Um as well as a open space uh reduction
um and that's again a minor reduction of about 188 square ft. And I'll note that um there are existing residential uses in the building as I mentioned, but none of them actually have access to this interior courtyard space. Uh this space that is being kind of recaptured here is
actually only accessible from the appellants office space. Uh and usable open space is actually not required for office space. Um so it's pretty dimminimous under the zoning code. And I'll note also that about 13 years ago, this building went through a similar
G-Cod and open space process when it went uh underwent renovation and was approved at that time. Um as well uh next slide please. Just a plan you can see here the site plan you can see in the hatched area uh
the proposed infill expansion um of the interior courtyard. Uh next slide please. Next slide, please. Yep. Thank you. This is a little bit more detail. Again, you can see the yellow area uh is what is being kind of recaptured and bumped out
for office space. Um and you can see um that the only windows that actually open into this area on the ground floor are either from the office space uh to be expanded or common area hallways. So, none of the units actually have any
windows that are going to be affected by this change. Uh, next slide, please. Very briefly, just to show you the existing conditions that we're talking about, completely paved over area. Um, not really utilized or uh utilizable
exterior space. Um, and it will just, this is the area that will be expanded for that 188 square ft. Uh, next slide I believe is the last one. Um, just the Fenway civic support letter. We did provide this to the board, Madame Chair. Uh, we met with them in November. They
did provide the letter of support. Uh, we did hold an ABRE meeting on October 16th. Uh, there were no attendees. And I'll just finally note that we did uh receive a planning recommendation of approval for the project. Uh, next slide. Matt, Mr. Ambass, I believe is
just a a final slide. So, I'll end Mayor. Madam Chair, I know it's been a long morning. Happy to answer any questions uh that you might have. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Are there questions from the board? >> Hearing none, may I have public testimony? >> Madam Chair and board members, Sigy Johnson with the Office of Neighborhood
Services. This applicant has completed a community process. Our office hosted an meeting on October 16th at which no concerns were raised. The Fenway Civic Association is in support of this application. With that background, our office defers judgment to the board. Thank you. >> Thank you.
Thank you. Next we have a Christian Simmonelli. Please do you have seconds. >> Good morning madam chair, members of the board. Christian Simmonali, Boston trust and we have both GCOD letters from the applicant. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh next we have Marinor
Perez. >> Uh thank you Mr. Ambassador, Madame Chair, members of the board. This is Maya Perez representing the Carpenters Union. On behalf of hundreds of our union residents, uh, I'd like to go on
record in support of this proposal. >> Thank you. >> Next, we have Holly Margulis. >> Hi, good morning, Madame Chair and members of the board. I am My name is Holly. I'm here on behalf of Boston City
Council Sharon Derkin for District 8. We know this project is not in our district, but since district 7 does not have a counselor and the Fenway Civic Association is in support of this project and in our district, we would like to give our support as well. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. There are no
additional comments. >> With that, may I have a motion? I'll make a motion of approval with a proviso that plans be submitted to the planning department for design re review uh to ensure that adequate light is maintained for the ground floor units
that are not part of the proposed expansion. I have a second >> second. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia. >> Yes. >> Miss Turner. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Langum. Yes, >> Mr. Collins. >> Yes, >> Miss Ponado. >> Yes, >> chair votes. Yes. The motion carries. Good luck. >> Thank you very much. Happy holidays. Thank you everybody.
>> Next we have case DOA 176 0363 with the address of 35 to 37 Bradford Street. the applicant and their representative are present. Jose will please explain.
>> Good morning. My name is Christopher Barry. I'm the architect for the project and representing the owner Kandell Edund who was not able to join us at this time. Um we have three issues on the zoning uh board of appeals. But first of
all, I'd like to just say that the owner of this property has owned and lived here for uh 20 to 30 years. She's very active in the community. Um, and she very much appreciates living in this neighborhood. And her goal is to expand
her existing single family residence with a single family residence, incorporating an ADU. And as she ages, she may move to the first floor as part of the ADU process. Um, we have, as I said, three issues.
One of us is the roof deck and the roof deck is above the garage as pictured in this rendering here. The one issue that we do not comply with article 34 uh section 64 is that the roof deck is does
not have a 5-ft setback off the building line. Um, our adjacent buildings to us, both Wilks Passage and Shaman Street, have roof decks of similar nature where they have no setback from the property line. So, we think this is not really a particular
issue. Um our other zoning request is for um a setback and this being a corner lot. If you'd like to advance to page
I think it's page seven of the PDF. Excuse me. It's page 15 of the PDF. You'll see the historical context. This is one of the Brmley Atlas maps of what used to exist in this neighborhood.
Um, there was a great fire which destroyed many of the buildings in the neighborhood and the one building left on this lot is uh 35 Bradford Street. Previously, this area was occupied by uh
row houses with zero lot lines and party walls. So in terms of the zoning, we don't believe we have a rear yard. We believe we have what would be considered uh zero lot line or party walls. But in that context, we have provided a
setback. It's uh minimal at 18 in in one point and 3 1/2 ft at another point. So we do have a setback incorporated into the project. Uh, also with the parks department, there's a
required or a 6-foot setback as part of their procedures. And this adds to what would be considered a setback of approximately 10 ft in some cases.
And the third item on our list is I don't know. Tell me what the third item is. Oh, article 25A and uh we have elevated all the new living space to the second floor. So, thus we have no living space
on the ground level and otherwise are in compliance with 25A. >> Thank you. Are there questions from the board? >> Hearing none, may I have public testimony? >> Hello, Madam Chair, members of the board. My name is Eva Jones representing the mayor's office and neighborhood
services regarding 35 to 37 Bradford Street. Our office defers to the board's judgment on this matter. A community process was conducted including an abundance meeting held on 102725 that was well attended by Southend community members. The feedback from this meeting was mostly support of the project and
the applicants uh needed um and the applicants need to create privacy on their property. Although there was some concerns about shadows on u abudding windows and the loss of sunlight from those abutters. Additionally, we did receive six letters in support express uh expressing support for the proposal.
The proposal was also reviewed by the Bradford Street Neighborhood Association and express support as well. At this time, the mayor's office and neighborhood services defers to the board's judgment on this matter. Thank you everyone for your time and consideration. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Next, we have Ashley from
consular fle. >> Thank you. Council film would like to go on record and support based on a good community process with neighbors and friends of Peters Park and the Bradford Street organization as well as the addition of windows facing Peters Park and better than required open space
aotment. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> And next we have the person WH KC. You have 90 seconds. >> Thank you Madame President and and members of the board. My name is Wendy
Chun. My husband, Paul Moroft, and I have lived in 23 Bradford Street, apartment 21, since 2008. We live next to 35 Bradford Street, and a walkway currently separates our homes. Um, we sympathize with the owner's desire to
expand and appreciate um the owner civic engagement. And as we state in our letter, it's therefore with great reluctance that we state our concerns. As the photos we submitted document, our current our unit currently overlooks Peters Park. These northeast windows are
an important source of light for our two floors of our unit, especially our second floor which is open plan and contains our kitchen, our living room and our dining room. This view is key to our uh our quality of life and also the value of our home. Granting a variance
to article 64 section 9 which is rear um yard insufficient will negatively affect the light in our apartment our view and the value of the home. Um all real estate advertisements state um what's attractive about our unit is the fact it
overlooks Peter Park. Um moving the the wooden proposed wooden structure forward would greatly alleviate our concerns. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. Thank you. Okay, next we have Paul Paul
M. >> I Yeah, my name's Paul. Um I'm the spouse of Wandi Chan and um I would just uh reiterate things that she stated there about the impact of this property. We do have a a short
presentation that illustrates that. If I'm allowed to share my screen, >> you just need to state your support or opposition briefly and why. We don't know share screens. >> Um though our opposition to this project as it's currently proposed is based on
the fact that they they're asking for the exemption to the rear yard requirement that that um requirements for the setback uh is the thing that directly impacts um our uh source of light from Peter's Park and that's the
source of our concerns about this project. >> Thank you. And we have oh someone else from the in the attendee section Chris if you can unmute yourself.
>> Hi. Thank you. Can you hear me? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Hi. Good morning madam chair and members of the board. Thank you for the time. My name is Chris. I reside at 1313 Washington Street and I am speaking as a directive butter and a designated representative for four other dire as
well in the building. And first, I just want to emphasize that we're not in opposition in any way to the applicant renovating their home. We love this neighborhood and we really welcome the investment. Um, however, we are a bit concerned that the current proposal is materially overscale for this sensitive
location. Bradford Street is a very small one-way street sitting adjacent to Peters Park, which is a beloved neighborhood park. And the rear yard relief request would impact the open character of the block and the feel of that public space. And we also believe
that the pictures provided in the PDF don't uh appropriately capture the scale of the addition that's being proposed. So specifically, we have two concerns. One is environmental safety. So by maximizing the footprint here in violation of article 64, the rear yard
insufficient and also article 25, the flood hazard, we're a bit worried about the displacement of storm water. Uh removing the permeable rear yard risks directing runoff to nearby properties and compromising wood pilings that support nearby structures and also
portions of Wils Passage itself. And then number two is just the privacy in the context. The relief for article 65 which is the restricted root structure removes a bit of the buffer zone around the area and extending the masking this far can create a bit of a canyon effect
that feels inappropriate. So we respectfully ask the board to the vote. >> Thank you. >> Any other race hands? >> No m there are no additional comments. >> May we address some of the concerns? Yeah, I'd like to understand the, you
know, the the feedback on moving the wooden, you know, structure, etc. And and obviously the 1313 Washington concerns. >> Um, well, in terms of moving the structure forward, um, I believe the opposition comes from people who are directly across the street and moving
this property or the wooden structure forward would actually reduce the amount of light they're going to receive. by keeping it in the background, it actually increases their access to light. So, I think it would be negative to sort of move this project forward towards Bradford Street. It's
intentionally to allow more light to reach that area. Additionally, the zoning allows for a 70 ft addition to go on this site and we're at about 20 ft. So, if we were to maximize our zoning
potential on this site, it would completely block anything up in terms of light or view to the park. And we're not in any way maximizing the site. We're actually proposing quite a minimal addition to the site in accordance with
what's allowed. Um, in terms of the deck issue, uh, Wilks Passage is full of decks that are consistent with what we're doing. They all have decks that are right up to their building line. And additionally on Shamad Avenue, there was
a project that was uh constructed which also has a deck in the same configuration that we're proposing. We don't believe that this restricts anybody's um access to privacy. In fact, we're planning to plant trees which will
uh add to the privacy of anybody in the adjacent neighborhood. Um and in terms of storm water or things of that nature, um we have complied with the G-Cod uh requirements, we have storm
water runoff on our site. Um this is Bata Park, which obviously is an enormous area that consumes water when something of that nature happens. and Wilks Passage is built on concrete piles. So, they certainly have nothing to worry about in terms of groundwater
problems or rotting piles. There's just not there's not a claim there. Is anything else you'd like me to address? >> Thank you. Are there other questions from the board? >> Has it been reviewed by Boston Landmarks Commission? We have had advisory, we've
had two advisory hearings with them and they are in support of the project although they cannot say that at this time. Um they are generally in support of and we will be going to them after this meeting. >> Thank you.
>> Okay. With that, may I have a motion? Um, I'll make a motion of approval with the proviso that the plans be submitted to the Boston Landmarks Commission for design review and submitted to the Department of Parks and Recreation for review.
>> There a second. >> Second, >> Mr. Sambridge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia. >> Yes. >> Miss Turner. >> Yes. >> Mr. Mr. Langum. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Collins, >> yes. >> Miss Ponado, >> yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carrying. >> At this time, Madame Chair will ask if there are any requests for
um having passed the 11:30 hour, we'll ask if there's any request for withdrawals or deferrals from the 11:30 hour. Hearing none, we'll continue um with the 9:30 KM
cases, which takes us to case BO8 178696 with the address of 233 Main Street. If the applicants andor their representative are present, will they please explain to the board? >> Sure. Uh good afternoon. Uh my name is
Tim Shen. I am the architect for the project. I'm representing the uh property owners Elena and James Melconian. Uh what this is is this is a uh very small building, 9 ft. You know, the whole lot is only 408 ft. Uh it's 9
ft wide, 46t long. And what we're trying to do now, it's a two-story structure. And we're trying upstairs is an apartment on the ground floor. It's it's retail. It's been a clothing store. It's been in my I've been, you know, in my lifetime, it's been all sorts of different things. It was an apartment a
long time long time ago. What we'd like to do is change it back to an apartment. Um the two we have two zoning violations. One is open space. There is no open open space. The house is the lot. And the other one is uh a residential use and the NS neighborhood
shopping subdist is a conditional use. We need CBA approval for um the exterior of the building will not change. We're making some interior changes on that ground floor. Just it's going to be it's going to be a studio apartment. >> It'll it'll be a studio apartment. It'll
be 313 square ft. Uh the existing apartment upstairs is 308 ft. Um and just some small changes. There's a half bath now. We'll add a shower, small kitchen, and it'll be living space. And that is the project. We had a a lightly
attended neighborhood meeting. And with all of that, I will hand it back to the board for questions. >> Can you um speak to the CEO issue? >> I'm sorry. >> COD. >> What is it? The compact living
>> co coastal flood resilience overlay district. >> We're not in that. That's further up Main Street. That's that's that's not where we are. >> Okay. Other questions from the board? >> Yes. It seems that the building next
door and also the building across the street also have residential units on the first floor. Is that correct? Because my assumption is that on main street most of the um spaces on the first floor are for for little space.
>> Um well directly across the street that's Mishuam. That's all ground floor walkin and immediately to the left of us on both sides across the block and immediately to the left it's residential. Um, diagonally across the block is the Bunka Hill shopping mall. I don't know what we call the shopping
area where Whole Foods is and all that, but um, there is some retail on the next block down there's a coffee coffee shop. Um, couple of things, but right where this is in on the other side of us, two block, you know, probably two buildings away, there's a cleaner, but um, there is retail in this area. There is
commercial, I mean, sorry, there is residential in this area. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yep. >> Thank you. Any other questions from the board? >> Can Mr. Hampton speak to the seaf fraud issue because that the recommendation is stating it's clearly in that area.
>> Yeah. Thank you, Miss Panado. Uh morning everybody. Jeff Hampton, uh city of Boston planning department. It actually is in the defraud. It's more on the Mishawan side. >> Yeah, it catches the property. It's not entirely in it and that's why it is referenced there. >> Okay.
>> Um it's and I understand Mr. machine like I I understand exactly where you're coming from. It's one of those things kind of like a G-Pod where it catches the property so the entire propertyy's in it, right? So, >> uh I understand where you're coming from. It is in there. Um
>> so I just wanted to set the record straight on that one. Um we recommended denial as you can see because uh not only for the seaf fraud but um when we did the plan Charlestown back in 2023 uh one of our concerns was the loss of
commercial space uh in the res uh the commercial areas especially the main thoroughare through Charlestown. Um we understand um the size of the unit and you know what it's going to be and you know Mr. Mr. Sheen can speak more to
that neighborhood than I can, but we're stay recommendations based uh very strongly on the plan Charles Town recommendations that came out a couple of years ago. >> Okay. All I'd say is the last 30 years there hasn't been a successful business
in there. It's it's 8 and 1/2 ft wide, you know, which I think is more appropriate. You know, it worked better residentially, but you know, my whole life there hasn't been a successful business in there. You know, I've been there 55 years, you know, and and it's it's upstairs is small as well, but
that's worked perfectly as as an apartment, and I think there's a need for it. You know, there aren't many small residential units in Charleston that that are affordable, you know, and this would be one of them. Um, I think it works better as a residence. >> I know it does.
>> Okay, with that, now let's take public testimony. >> Madam Chair and board members, C. Johnson with Office of Neighborhood Services. This applicant completed the community process and this meeting was held on third at which no concerns were raised that back on their office to defer his judgment to the board. Thank
you >> madam chair. There are no additional comments. >> Okay. With that may I have a motion? >> Yes madam chair. I think the conditions of this uh property are existing. The building will not undergo any exterior
changes and there is also present of residential uses on the first floor on the left and in the right side of the building. So with that I make a motion of approval with planning department review. >> Is there a second? >> Second.
>> Mr. Stebridge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia. >> Yes. >> Miss Turner. Yes, >> Mr. Langum. >> Yes, >> Mr. Collins. >> Yes,
>> Miss Panado. >> Yes, >> chair votes. Yes. The motion carries. Good. >> Thank you, everybody. >> The next case has been deferred. So, that takes us to the hearing schedule for 11:00 a.m. We'll ask again if there are any
requests for withdrawals or deferrals from the 11 a.m. hearing. Hearing none, we'll move along to case BOA 1761 1297 with the address of 851 Beacon Street.
If the applicant andor their representative are present, will they please explain to the board? >> Yes, Mr. Stridge. Uh, thank you. Good morning, Madam Chair, members of the board. Attorney Derek Small of a business address of 51 Doppson Road. Um,
I'm representing the owner of the property, Mr. Yeper. And today we're here seeking relief to change the legal occupancy of the building from a lodging house for 15 lodgers and a beauty salon to a lodging house for 20 lodgers. Um so
basically what we're seeking to do is convert the commercial space on the first floor of the of the property into an additional room for the already existing lodging house. Um, this is a multif family residential zoning
subdist. Um, all of the violations that we are cited for are uh pre-existing non-conforming except with the basement unit being forbidden. Um, again, that's on the the first level, but they're considering in the basement, and we're
just removing the commercial space of the beauty salon and creating another uh room for the lodging house. Um we the property is managed by GPM properties and Shan McCarnity and um we
have a very good working relationship with the Ottawa Circle Neighborhood Association. I'm sure they're on and they're um you may have received their letter and their support in this and um our um relationship with them will will continue. I can stop there and answer
any questions um that the board may have. >> Thank you. Are there questions from the board? Hearing none. Is there public testimony? >> Yes. Sigy Johnson with the Office of Neighborhood Services. This applicant has completed the community process. Our office hosted an abutters meeting on
September 22nd at which Abutters raised concerns about trash storage on the lot with low amount with a low amount of open space as well as the property being used for short-term rentals. Abutter spoke highly of the renovation that's been ongoing at the property and its aesthetics. The Ottawan Circle
Neighborhood Association is in support of this application and requested a proviso which is detailed in their letter that back on our office defers judgment to the board. Thank you. >> Thank you madame chair. We have one person holdy.
I'm not sure if he's speaking for the >> hi. Good morning madam chair and members of the board. I am here representing um Boston City Council Sharon Durkin for district 8. We have spoken with the Ottabon Circle Neighborhood Association and would like to go on the record in support of this project at this time um
given the proviso that short-term rental stays be limited to 28 days at this property. Thank you. >> Thank you madam chair. There are no additional comments. >> Okay. Uh are you Mr. Small the proviso
is that acceptable to you? that the the proviso, Madam Chair, is not acceptable at this time. As as we have been working with Autobond Circle, um we have committed to um not seeking short-term stays. We we we are generally lease our
property to um visiting nurses, visiting professionals, um um professors at Boston University. Um and and most of them are longer term. Um, however, I don't think that um if if a short-term
rental comes up and we have to take it due to financial reasons, we should I think we want to be able to do that. So, u we're we're we're we're not amendable with that, but we will continue to work to to establish middle midterm and long-term uh leases for the property and
we will continue to work with um Autobon Circle on that. >> Questions from the board? Is there a motion? >> Is there a motion? >> I put forward a motion of approval.
>> Second. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Sambridge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Vonsio. >> Yes. Miss Turner, >> yes. >> Mr. Langham,
>> yes. >> Mr. Collins, >> yes. >> Miss Bonado, >> yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. >> Thank you, Madam Chair, members of the board. Happy holidays to everyone. Thank you.
Next we have case BOA 179 6378 with the address of 1198 center street. This is also an article I 80 case from
the mayor's office of housing. If the applicant andor the representative are present, will they please explain the case to the board? >> Thank you. Good morning, almost afternoon. Uh my name is Carla Chaffy at Nixon Peabody uh with an address of 53
State Street in Boston. Um I'm joined today with Deborah Morris who's the VP of real estate at Kipoo Senior Life, the appellant in this matter. Uh as well as PCA architects who are here for any questions the board may have. Uh we can
move to the next slide please. Uh this is a 100% affordable senior housing development in the Roslandale neighborhood. Um 16 units will be limited to those making up to 30% area
median income and 64 sorry 62 units will be at or below 50% of AMI. As noted, this uh project received article 80 BPDA board approval in September. We can move to the next slide and discuss these
milestones. Um and we're coming before you today because we are requesting relief both dimensionally dimensionally and a conditional use permit. Um we can go to
the next slide please and actually the one after that as well. Keep going. Yeah. Um we are also requesting a conditional use permit for multifamily uh housing in the is district of the Roslandale
neighborhood. Um I would note however that elderly housing is a use that is permitted by right per the code. Um that was initially what our application was made under, but since our refusal uh
letter from ISD noted the need for a conditional use permit for multif family and we believe we meet all the standards in the code, we're coming before you today with a conditional use permit request as well. Um we are requesting
relief for uh floor area as well as building height and setbacks. Uh, next slide, please. I'd also like to refer you to a supplemental memorandum that was provided um in support of meeting the
legal standards in the code. Um, for the uh benefit of time today, I would ask you to rely on that submission as we may not hit on every point in our presentation. We can continue to the next slide. This is an aerial view, so you get a
really good look at the Arnold Arboritum as well as the proximity to um JP and West Roxberry. We can continue to the next slide, please. Um here's a more closeup aerial that
really demonstrates um the odd shape of the lot and the tear shape of the lot um which has provided some challenges in our request to redevelop here. We can go to the next slide please.
And then the next three slides which we can just kind of slowly scroll through as I speak that would be great. um our views from Center Street and Walter Street, which shows that there's a significant grade change up to what is
now used as a parking lot associated with the Hebrew Senior Rehabilitation Center campus. That parking lot is extremely underutilized and not necessary for operations. And that's why there is a
proposal here to develop senior housing which will operate independently from the campus and is not part of the campus but provides an essential service to lowincome seniors.
We can go to the next slide please. This is just a aerial view with the site plan overlaid on the um on existing conditions. Given the slopes on the property, we're proposing to have half
of the first floor providing um really underground parking for 17 spaces and the rest of the first floor will be amenity space for the occupants including a bike room and community room. We can go to the next slide
please. Uh I think this site plan is a very important illustration of the hardship that would be imposed if the codes 100 ft or 50 foot um setbacks were applied.
It's 100 ft for the front, 100 for sides, and 50 for the rear. Um given this is a corner lot, however, the um side yard setbacks may not apply. um it would be infeasible to
continue and complete this project um if these outdated standards of the code were applied to to this project. Um I've included this slide, slide 12. It's an illustration of the landscaping and hardscaping that we will be doing
around the proposed building. Um, we see this as an extreme improvement over the existing and very um, dull looking parking lot. And here is an elevation of our building
that shows the height. We've prepared studies for the planning board um, regarding how the height fits into the existing buildings and the corridor along Center Street. Um so there's no detriment to the community with that
aspect of the development. You can go to the next slide. And we have also completed a study um through our architect PCA on how the setbacks that we're proposing are also in harmony with some of the residential
uses further down Walter Street as well as the larger mixed uses along Center Street. So, this is a view if you're looking down Center Street, I believe, heading north. We can go to the next slide, please.
Um, this shows the intended users of of this building. Um, again, this is an age restricted and incomerestricted building, providing a great benefit to the community, not just for the use, but as well as beautifying what's now a very
underutilized and unattractive parking area. Um, and the without the relief requested, um, this land would be unused and have no value. So, I'll wrap up in my comments and
saying that we respectfully request um the grant of the dimensional relief requested as well as the conditional use permit for multif family housing. >> Thank you. >> We're here for questions. Thank you. >> Are there questions from the board?
>> Yes, ma'am. Sher, I know the location very well. I think this is a great site for for the whole housing. Now my question is about about traffic that intersection on center and water street is a very dangerous intersection
during the especially during the peak hour just cars struggle to cross the street on center. So do you have any plan for your residents so they are safe when they cross the street both on center and water street and also if the city has a proposal I know they are
doing some construction at the moment but I don't have any clarity of the planing how the street improvements are going to benefit future residents in your building. >> Yes, thank you for that question. Um you're correct. the DCR is has proposed and it's really a a wonderful
coincidence for putting this project forward that they're investing so much at the intersection there of center and Walter Streets. Um if you could and if you like you could slide back up to the landscaping plan that's provided. You can see the streetscape improvements
will include um a signalized intersealized crosswalk over to the arboritum. Um, and we're also increasing the visibility, crosswalk, sidewalk improvements so that if there were visitors to the
residential building from the um rehabilitation center campus, that would be um a safe and uh very clearly marked path. So, we're working um together with um
and um our project is integrated well into those safety improvements that they are proposing as well. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> With that, may I have public testimony? >> Madam Chair and members of the board, for the record, my name is Jeremy Beer.
I'm the Roslandale community engagement specialist for the Office of Neighborhood Services. The applicant has completed the comm the BPDAled community process. The BPDA held a virtual public meeting on July 23rd, 2025. The public meeting was advertised in local newspapers on the BPDA website and
distributed to the BPDA's Rousville email list. Uh the proponent was the proponent did present their proposal to Longfellow Area Neighborhood Association, who took a vote of non oppoition. To date, our office has received one letter of support from city council Pepin's office and strong support of affordable housing for
seniors. Thank you for your time and the mayor's office of neighborhood services would like to defer to the board for their judgment. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Next we have a Nora Lutz. You have a nice second. >> Thank you. Good morning everyone. I'm Nora Lutz. I'm a development officer
with the mayor's office of housing. Hebrew Senior Life has applied to MLO for funding related to the proposal before you today. HSA HSL has refined their project based on feedback received through numerous community and abutter meetings. The mayor's office of housing is in support of this project. Thank
you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. There are no additional comments >> with that. May I have a motion? >> Madam Chair, I would like to put forward Go ahead. >> Go ahead. No, you go ahead. >> Thank you. I would like to put forward a motion of approval. This is a very uh
good and interesting project. I applaud the creation of affordable housing at this site and I would like to ask the proponent to continue working with the city to ensure that uh the intersection is going to be safe for all pedestrians even though even for residents in this
for this building and anyone walking across that that intersection. >> Thank you. Is there a second? Thank you Mr. Stebridge. >> Yes, >> Mr. Valencia. Yes,
>> Miss Turner. >> Yes, >> Mr. Langum. >> Yes, >> Mr. Collins. >> Yes, >> Miss Panado. >> Yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. Good luck. So, let's take a 15minut
break. Thank you everyone. >> Recording stopped. Mr. Stebridge >> present madam chair. >> Thank you Mr. Valencia. >> President
>> thank you Mr. Ms. Turner >> present madam chair. >> Thank you Mr. Langum. President, Madam Chair, >> Mr. Collins, >> present, Madam Chair, >> Miss Ponado, >> President, Madam Chair.
>> Thank you. Floor is yours, Mr. Sbridge. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, going back to the hearing scheduled for 11:00 a.m., we will go to case BOA 176 6144
with the address of 1750 to 1758 Dorchester Avenue. If the applicants andor their representative are present, will they please explain to the board? >> Good afternoon, Madam Chair and board. Uh it's Derek Rubenoff from Derek
Rubenoff Architect 8284 Spring Street, West Roxberry. Um I'm represent representing the applicant u uh Demetrius Jim and Bobby Jerry Simides. Um we're the architect of the project. Uh the uh project is is pretty simple.
It's an existing threestory mixeduse building. It's got three commercial units on the first floor. Um and it has uh two residential units on each of the second and third floors. Um the total
building square foot is about 11,282. And uh that includes 7,500 square ft of residential combined uh on each of uh on combined on the two floors above. And so the uh the project again is is pretty
simple. What we uh would like to do um is take the the four residential units total that are there right now, which are quite large. They're either um there's two three bedrooms and two four bedrooms that are uh not very good layouts, and there's some uh some
redundant stairways in there. And what we'd like to do is renovate the interior of the building um and uh reconfigure it so that it becomes eight two-bedroom units. So, the actual number of bedrooms will only increase by about two or so
what's there right now. Um, along the way, what we'd like to do is u make some facade improvements uh on the outside. That was something that the uh St. Marks Area Civic Association uh uh wanted to make sure that we uh articulated. So, we
we're happy to do that. Um the uh zoning relief uh that is required for the project includes um includes insufficient parking. Article 6541
um off streetet parking. Uh the building sits entirely on the lot pretty much. Uh there's nowhere to put parking. Um and we are within half a mile of two tea stations, Ashmont and Shelton. Uh half a mile walk. Uh we need uh we have
insufficient open space per dwelling unit. Um again, there's nothing we could we could do about that. The building sits directly on on pretty much the entire site. And lastly, um we have insufficient lot area uh per the newly
proposed dwelling units. Um some of the uh comments that came up in the uh in the butters meeting and then also in the the meeting with the community group um were uh making sure that we are going to deal with trash. So, uh, we do we are
going to keep the existing side door off Lawndale Street, which is, uh, it's a corner wide. And, uh, in inside that door, we will have room for the, uh, the apartment trash. Um, as well as space in the basement. Um, and, uh, we will be
removing some redundant stairs. As I mentioned before, we're going to be sprinkling with uh, an NFPA13 commercial sprinkler system. So prudent to the safety for the building with that sprinkler system. Uh there's no expansion of the envelope.
>> Okay. Are there questions from the board? >> Can we just page the plans quickly >> like what's happening to the exterior? >> Yeah, sure. On the exterior. So, the outside right now is is is pretty tired.
It's got vinyl siding. What we're going to do is um replace the existing windows. >> Can you direct the ambassador what slide to go on so we can look at it? >> Yeah, sure. Uh try um I think 11. Page 11.
You're going to go down a few more here. These are the plans. There we go. So the uh the top two rows are the demo elevations and the bottom two rows are the proposed. And so the the proposed exterior modifications will include
replacing the existing vinyl siding with a better quality sighting uh most likely uh most likely Hardy. Um and uh replacing the existing windows with better uh more energy efficient windows and uh replacing the shingles on the
mansard with with uh high quality architectural shingles. >> Thank you. >> Sure. Any other questions from the board? >> May I have public testimony? >> Hello madam chair, members of the board. My name is Eva Jones representing the
mayor's office and neighborhood services regarding 1750 to 1758 Dorchester Avenue. Our office defers to the board's judgment. A community process once conducted including an abutters meeting held on 92425 that was attended by about six Doorchester community members. The
feedback from this meeting was some concerns about the price of the proposed apartments being actually affordable for the neighborhood aside from the required affordable unit. uh concerns about the increased strain of parking on the community and significant concerns about the increased accumulation of trash on
the property citing no good plan on the part of the applicant with insufficient plans for trash dis disposal displayed in the plans. The proposal was also reviewed by the St. Marks Area Civic Association at their meeting on 102925. The association expressed support and
has also expressed that the applicant worked productively with the community and the neighborhood association to create a plan for trash disposal that everyone was happy with and that the community agreed would reduce the rodent concerns in the community as well as some exterior improvements agreed by the applicant. At this time, the mayor's
office and neighborhood services defers to the board's judgment on this matter. Thank you everyone for your time and consideration. >> Thank you. Um >> hello sorry. Hello madam chair, members of board lemur miss from council for sale's office are absent let go on
record spoil this proposal. Thank you. >> Thank you. Um there is one person who have a couple questions. I I'm not sure if Cedric wants to speak or or they want to read the questions in the chat.
Cedric Adams. >> Why don't you just read them? >> Okay. Basic the question is where will be the ten where will the tenants park and the next question is can a provision be included that trash be keeping
dollars? >> That's for the applicant. >> Uh yeah. So again we're within half a mile of two T stations. there's nowhere to park on the property. We're only increasing the number of bedrooms uh by two. Um even though we're increasing the
number of units because there are smaller units that um are more efficient layouts. Um so we don't anticipate a significant increase in load and parking. Um and uh secondly, the the
trash will be kept inside. We have space designated on the first floor and in the basement um that is accessible from the the existing door on the side street. That that was a condition um that we we deal with that uh in order to get the
the neighborhood group approval. So we worked that out uh with them. >> Other questions from the board hearing? None. May I have a motion? Motion to approval. >> Is there a second? >> Second.
>> Mr. Stebridge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia. >> Yes. >> Miss. Turner. >> Yes. >> Mr. Langum. >> Yes. >> Mr. Collins. >> Yes. >> Miss Bonado.
>> Yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. >> Thank you. Happy holidays. Appreciate it. Next we have case BO8 176 2226 with the address of 411 Adam Street.
the applicants into the represent. Do you see the applicant for this? >> No. >> 411 Adam Street. If you're on, can you please raise your hand? Okay, I see one person. >> Yes. >> Hi. Hi. How are you? Good. Good
afternoon everyone. My name is N and I am at 411 Adam Street just a mass 02122. Um I open a takeout restaurant
uh only and I need uh I need to remove the proposal to have the permanent the permanent co um it been pending for a while but then I don't know what to do. Please can you help me uh go through this? Thank you so
much. Thank >> Thank you. So So you just need the proviso removed it looks like. >> Yes. Okay. Any questions from the board? May I have public testimony? >> No. Jesus, is there are there any raised
hands for public testimony? >> Hello, madam chair, members of the board, the mayor's office does not require community process on provisos. >> Okay. Do may I have a moment? Okay. May I have a motion? >> Make a motion to approve. >> Is there a second? >> Second.
>> Second. >> Mr. Stebridge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia? >> Yes. >> Miss Turner? >> Yes. >> Mr. Langum? >> Yes. >> Mr. Collins? >> Yes. >> Miss Bonado? >> Yes.
>> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. Good luck, ma'am. >> So, I'm Jose >> with us. You are. Yes, ma'am. Good luck. >> Thank you. So, thank you so much. Thank you. >> Next, we have case BOA
174 0969 with the address of three Rosello Street. The applicant and their representative present to the board. >> Thank you. Yes. Uh, good afternoon,
Madam Chair, members of the board. My name is Vernon Woodworth at 9 Elizabeth Street. on the principle of urban design and the representative for the owners. This is a proposal to change the use of
this existing two family building to legalize an existing third unit uh which exists on the attic floor. Uh it is in a 1 F5000 zone. So a use variance is required
and uh also cited this floor area ratio. In addition to the additional living area in the attic, there has been over the years an extension of the first floor dwelling unit into the basement. Uh this is partially habitable
and uh first floor is existing but there is a connecting staircase directly to that new habitable area in the basement. And uh so the F is the maximum in this zone is 0.5 but uh with these additions
it'll be 0.55 a slight increase over the maximum allowed F. And the final citation is for off- streetet parking. Currently, the two legal units are provided with off-
streetet parking and uh I'm told that on street parking is readily available. Uh but there's also the possibility that a third parking space could be created on the site. So this is the first floor. Perhaps we should go up to
and the second floor is also an existing dwelling unit. The third floor shows us the proposed dwelling unit. Second means of well let's go back to the third floor plan just for a minute. Thank you. And uh you can see that on both the second and third the second means of egresses
via an existing fire escape. The only construction proposed is to enlarge a window to a door accessing that fire escape from the new thirdf flooror dwelling unit. So we do have a rear elevation showing
that existing fire escape and uh that would be the next slide I believe. We could just scroll down to that. Thank you. Right there. Yeah, perfect. And so
essentially everything you're seeing in terms of the fire escape and the windows are existing. The only modification would be the enlargement of that one window on the third floor uh to create a door for to facilitate access to the
second means of egress. So uh you can see the lot lot plan here. Uh this about a playground. So we have uh submitted to parks and recreation for their review and uh I think probably
somebody from mayor's office can describe our community process. >> Thank you. Are there questions from the board? Um, Madame Chair, yes. Um, what what are you planning to do exactly with the basement?
>> Yes, the there is an existing extension of the first floor dwelling unit into the basement. It's a basically a family room uh with a bathroom and a closet, which I suppose could double as a bedroom.
Uh this is connected internally by a stair to the first floor unit and uh I think that's all there is to it really. The uh there's a possibility that we may need
to upgrade the fire resistance rating between that extended living space and the adjacent mechanical areas. Uh we'll be going through that with the building department should we secure our variances. >> What's the floor ceiling height in the
basement? >> It's currently uh between 7 and 76. >> Okay. Thank >> Okay. Any other questions from the board? >> May I have public testimony? >> Hello, Madam Chair, members of the
board. My name is Eva Jones representing the mayor's office and neighborhood services regarding three Rosella Street. Our office defers to the board's children. A community process was conducted including an abutters meeting held on 81825 that was attended by about four community members where no major concerns were expressed. The proposal
was also reviewed by the Popes Hill Civic Association and they have expressed non-opposition regarding the proposal. At this time, the mayor's office of neighborhood services defers to the board's judgment on this matter. Thank you everyone for your time and consideration. Hello. Uh, Madam Chair, members of the board, Liam Remis from councelor
Fitzgerald's office RF would like to go on record support the proposal. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Madam Chair. There are no additional comments. >> With that, may I have a motion? >> I'll put forward a motion of approval with no building code relief.
>> There a second. >> Second, >> Mr. Stebridge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencio. >> Yes. Miss Turner, >> yes. >> Mr. Langel, >> yes. >> Mr. Collins,
>> yes. >> Miss Ponado, >> yes. >> Chair votes, yes. The motion carries. >> Thank you very much. >> Next, we have case BOA 177 58.
the address of 174 cell street. If the applicant andor their andor the representative present they please to the board. >> Yes. Good afternoon everyone. Um my name is Conn L. I'm the executive director at
Laurel Ridge Rehab and we are the um petitioner in this case. Um we are a nonprofit nurse home in Jamaica plane and we're looking um to expand our our ground footprint um to modernize the facility a little bit, create a new
rehab space for our um our residents and in the process also um provide some more activities and family space for the residents as well. Um, at this point I'll turn over to Kevin Kak who's our um architect on the project and can explain exactly what
this this project looks like. Okay, >> great. Thanks, Colin. Uh, hopefully everybody can see the presentation. Um, that's our team. Colin is he mentioned is the um is a representative for Laura Ridge. Uh, I represent I'm the vice
president of design for Timberline Construction. and we are a design build firm located in Canton, Massachusetts. Um, and then April Kelly who may or may not be on this meeting also representing a Century who's the parent company for uh for the project. So, uh, next uh
slide please. Can the ambassador move the slide? Thank you. Uh so this is just an existing site plan we've uh the or an aerial view uh we've taken from Google Earth. You can see um the area that we've highlighted um that's a little bit
brighter is the uh is the site itself. Um that's Forest Hill Street um that it fronts Franklin Park Zoo is sort of to the back and the side and then there's a church adjacent to it. Across the street is primarily a residential zone. Um as Colin pointed out this is an existing uh
skilled nursing facility. It's 120 beds. Uh it's a fourstory building. Um and uh and but the the site the and my understanding is the use itself is not allowed. So we're asking because we are modifying the uh the project and the
building um we're here before the um before the board because of the non-existing use. Um next slide, please. Thank you. Uh so these are just a couple of views of what it looks like today. Um, as I mentioned, there's a four-story building. Part of
the building, um, has a port koshchair. Uh, that port koshchair originally was designed to allow vehicles to get underneath it. Um, and that's where the current entrance is. The slide on the left hand side um is looking back towards Forest Hill Street. So, the
building's on the left hand side. Um, and then the building that's on the right, you can see that poor Crocher. Um uh that basically is what we are proposing to infill. Um the porticochair is not high enough to allow taller vehicles or ambulances. So it doesn't
really serve its purposes um at this point. And uh as we'll get to uh we are looking to fill it in for a couple of reasons that I will get uh I will get into. So uh next slide please. Uh so this is the existing site plan. Um
again, Forest Hill Street would be to the bottom of the page as you're looking at it, the right hand side. This is the ground floor level. Uh the ground floor primarily is uh the office uh and common space. Uh so there's existing uh common
space, there's an existing uh physical therapy and rehab space. Uh the kitchen, all of the residential uh uses are the skilled nursing uh neighborhoods are all on the upper three floors. Each one has 40 beds. Uh again, the 120 beds. And the
port kosher is that area that's dotted between the building and that green space. There's a little bit of parking um adjacent. The majority of the parking is actually uh up at the top of the hill. You keep driving and it's up which was which is off the page. Uh so next
slide please. Uh so this is the proposed plan. Um again infilling the poor cochair. Um we are not extending the building beyond the existing footprint. Again that we're basically filling in right underneath the poor cohair. So it's an expansion of
the space but the footprint is not getting any bigger. Um we are within all the setbacks currently and we will remain in the setbacks. Uh the this renovation is primar it's resident focused. Um we are relocating the existing physical therapy space closer
to the main entrance. Uh we are also um adding a little bit of private dining space. So we're adding an amenity space for uh for the residents. Again it's very resident focused. Um we are also uh will as part of this
we do need to move the entrance uh because obviously the entrance is in the port share. So we'll be moving that. Uh there are some small um renovations to the parking area which basically is just as we've made some changes. Obviously, we're not going to drive underneath
anymore. So, we've removed that section of the pavement. Added a couple of parking spaces for visitors. So, that way, uh, we have a little bit more visitor space. We've also added some green space. Uh, what what was parking, we're going to actually increase the amount of green space, uh, and decrease
the amount of impervious area. Uh and then obviously we we're modifying the uh the walkways to make sure that you can still um access the building at the the new main entrance. Uh and then the next uh last slide. Um
so this is just sort of the um existing perspective what you what's there today. Um and then what you'll see. So again this is sort of taken as if you were just getting onto the site uh from Forest Hill Street. So you look diagonally again, you see underneath there's that existing poor share that
you drive underneath. The right hand slide shows how we're we're basically adding some green space in front of that and expanding the green space and then we're infilling the uh infilling that to create the additional space. It's about
uh it's about 1,500 square ft of space that will be added. Um, and again, it's not beyond the um the footprint as you could see from the from the rendering. Uh, and that's the project. >> Thank you. Are there questions from the board?
>> Hearing none, may I have public testimony? >> Madam Chair and members of the board, for the record, my name is Jeremy Bmpery. I'm the Jamaica Plank community engagement specialist for the Office of Neighborhood Services. The applicant has completed the committee process which consisted of a voters meeting facilitated on October 21st that was very lightly attended with no inquiries
or concerns raised. Next, the proponent presented to Jamaica Plane Neighborhood Council on November 5th where they received a vote of approval. Thank you for your time and the mayor's office of neighborhood services would like to defer to the board for their judgment. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Next, we have Minor Perez.
>> Thank you, Mr. Ambassador, Madame Chair, members of the board. This is Minor Perez. Uh we the carpenters union is in support of the project. However, we want to remind the owner of the importance of using subcontractors that don't commit
tax fraud and play by the rules. Thank you. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. There are no additional comments. >> With that, may I have a motion? >> Motion to approve. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Stumbr.
>> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia? >> Yes. >> Miss Turner? Yes, >> Mr. Langum. >> Yes, >> Mr. Collins. >> Yes, >> Miss Ponado. >> Yes.
>> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. Good luck. >> Thank you. >> Next, we have case BOA 179 5520 with the address of 1673 to 1679
Washington Street. the applicants and their representative present. Please explain to the board. >> Hi, Mr. Secretary. Hello, madam chair, members of the board. This is Mike Ross former princel one international place in Boston. I'm here with chef owner uh
and Boston resident George Menddees. Uh there is uh this is a conditional use application for ground floor restaurant uh with takeout for a tenant buildout that was previously a dry cleaners in the south end neighborhood uh zoning
district within the uh neighborhood development area subdist along the commercial and residential corridor Washington Street. Um, as you can see from this floor plan here, uh, the restaurant will feature a chef's counter
with 12 seats, a dining area with 20 seats, a bar with seven seats, a lounge area with 10 seats, standing for six, resulting in a total of 55 people. If you look at that floor plan, Washington
Street runs along the right hand side of the building and kind of that upper portion will also be an attached bakery cafe that's connected to the restaurant itself. And the bakery cafe will uh allow for 28 seats standing for five and
collectively the entire um floor plan will allow for 88 people plus eight employees total of 96 for capacity. Uh, the current plan is for the restaurant to be open from 12:00 p.m. to 12:00 a.m. and the bakery would be open from 7:00
a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Uh, the Blackstone Franklin Square Neighborhood Association submitted a letter of support to the board and I'll pause there if there are any questions. >> Thank you. Are there questions from the board? Hearing none, may I have public testimony?
>> Hello, Madam Chair, members of the board. My name is Eva Jones representing the mayor's office and neighborhood services regarding 1673 to 1679 Washington Street. Our office defers to the board's judgment. A community process was conducted including an ups meeting held on 9425 that was well
attended by Southoun community members. The feedback from this meeting with significant support and excitement for the proposal as well as uh the proposal was reviewed by the Blackstone Franklin Square Civic Association and they have also expressed full support about this proposal. Thank you everyone for your
time and consideration. >> Thank you. >> Madame chair, there are no additional comments. >> Okay, with that, may I have a motion? >> Motion of approval. >> May I have a second? >> Second. >> Second. >> Mr. Sbridge?
>> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia? >> Yes. >> Miss Turner? >> Yes. >> Mr. Langum? >> Yes. >> Mr. Collins? Yes, >> Miss Panado. >> Yes.
>> Chair votes. Yes. The motion carries. Good luck. >> Thank you very much. >> Next we have case DOA 1794750 with the address of 85 to 99 Brookie Street.
This is also an article 80 case. 50 applicants and will their representative explain the case to the board please. >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Secretary and good afternoon, Madam Chair, members of the board. For the record, Attorney Matt Eckle with Fletcher Tilton on behalf of
the applicant. Also joining me today is Henry Chel from CBT, the project architect. As general background, this proposal includes the conversion of an existing office building located at 95 Berkeley Street, which you can see there on your screen, into a mixeduse building
as part of the city's office to residential conversion program. This presents a unique opportunity to adapt this structure into some muchneeded residential housing units. The project site itself is located at the corner of Berkeley Street, which you can see to the right side of your uh screen there,
and Chandler Street, which is the left at the intersection. Uh moving away from the screen from right to left. Uh the lot itself contains 22,665 square ft and is located in the South Ends Community Commercial Subdist.
Overall, the proposed project program will include maintaining the existing firstf flooror office space which is currently occupied by mass and we'll create a new ground level retail space uh which you can kind of see the entrance to there in the front lower
portion of the screen. Uh additionally there will be 92 residential units created above on floors 2 through six. Uh the prop property itself is located at the edge of the south end overlooking the Mass Pike and represents a sustainable and appropriate approach to
urban redevelopment. We're reusing the existing structure and responding to the growing demand for additional housing within the city and the state as a whole. The site is very walkable. It is transit connected area and has close proximity not only to the mass bike but
also the MBTA orange and green lines as well as a bus uh several bus routes one of which is located with a bus stop right outside the front door. Uh we believe that the preservation of the office space as well as the new retail and interactive uh lobby amenity space
for the residential will really activate the streetscape and be pedestrian friendly in character. Uh we also are proposing existing parking uh to to remain at the lower level as well as uh approximately 45 new bike parking spaces
in that below grade level uh to promote multiple modes of transportation to and from the site. As a whole, as mentioned, we're proposing 92 residential units, 41 of which will be studios, 42 will be one-bedroom units, and nine will be two-bedroom units. Uh there'll be a
total of 18 affordable units out of those 92 proposed. Uh just to walk through the floor plans briefly. The lower level and we can progress through the uh presentation please. Uh the lower level will contain parking as well as several bike storage rooms as mentioned.
Uh the first floor will contain that existing office space and that tenant will remain as well as the retail space I mentioned and the uh main lobby and amenity space. The second floor will contain 20 units. The third floor will contain 18 units as well as an existing
common deck for the uh residential units to provide open and usable space for those tenants. And then the fourth through sixth floor floor plates are all very similar and will contain approximately 18 units per floor. Uh, as we're progressing through the slideshow
here, you can just see the location of the of the parcel and the project site overlooking the pike and there at the top end of the the South End district. Uh, in terms of zoning, we are seeking one single variance for usable open space per dwelling unit. Obviously, as
this is a office to residential conversion program, uh there's really no way to create any additional open space. However, we are maintaining the deck as mentioned, which will be common to all residents. Uh we also have a area adjacent to the Ellis uh children's
memorial park uh which currently is is contains some trees and open space which will also be maintained. Uh this is just a context view here looking back from the pike towards the the uh subject property and the existing building. This is a unique situation where really
nothing is being changed to the exterior of the building. All the work is being done uh on the interior to create the residential units. As Mr. Steambridge mentioned this is an article 80 project and went through the article 80 process receiving approval in November at the
board hearing. Uh as part of the process we also met with the Ellis Souththen neighborhood association as well as the Bay Village Neighborhood Association. Uh additionally we are proposing some some mitigation along Chandler Street. Currently the driveway access uh to the
belowrade parking facility and the abuing sidewalk are not accessible. Uh so seeing the need to create an accessible pathway along Chandler Street in the sidewalk connecting to the Ellis uh park kind of at the to the left of your screen there, we will be
reconstructing that driveway entrance uh shrinking it so it's a smaller pedestrian path to cross and also making it uh accessible again to the Ellis Memorial Children's Park. Uh we did submit several letters of support including one from Rep. Aaron Michaelitz as well as the Ellis Souththen
Neighborhood Association and several director Butters. And with that, our team will pause and we'll happily take any questions the board may have. >> Thank you. Are there questions from the board? >> They have public testimony. >> Hello, Madam Chair, members of the
board. My name is Eva Jones representing the mayor's office and neighbor services regarding 85 to 95 or 99 Berkeley Street. Our office defers to the board's judgment. A community process was conducted by the Boston planning department beginning on 111325. And the feedback that my colleague, the
South End Bay Village leaison Sarah Sharp, has received has been significant support about the proposal. The community feels that the proposal is beneficial and adds housing to the community. Although there is some opposition uh citing uh apartments will come with the addition of cars and increased traffic and congestion in the
neighborhood. The proposal was also reviewed by the Ellis South End Neighborhood Association and they have supported the proposal. Additionally, we have received eight letters in support regarding the proposal, including from Representative Michael Witz. At this time, the mayor's office of neighborhood services defers with the board's
judgment. Thank you everyone for your time and consideration. >> Thank you. Next. Next, we have Christian Simon, please. >> Good morning, Madam Chair, members of the board. Christian Simmonelli, Boston Growler Trust, and we have both G-Cod letters from the applicant.
>> Thank you. >> Okay, next we have Dylan Norris, please. >> Good afternoon, Madam Chair and members of the board. My name is Dylan Norris. I'm the project manager with the development and review division of the planning department and the project manager for the article 80B large
project before you today. Just to cover the article 80 process, the development team filed their project notification form on September 29th, 2025, which kicked off the public process. It was distributed through the South End neighborhood distribution list. The plan department then sponsored and hosted a
virtual public meeting on October 15th, 2025. Public meetings were posted on the plan department calendar, website, and advertised through the local newspapers, as well as email notifications sent out to all subscribers of the South End neighborhood email update list. Local elected officials and their staff were
also notified of the meeting. The comment period for this filing closed on October 29th. The project was then brought before for review and approved at the BPDA board on November 13th, 2025. I'm happy to answer any questions members of the board may have related to
the article 80 review process. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Next, we have minor Perez. >> Thank you, Mr. Ambassador Badan Chair, members of the board, this is Mina Perez representing hundreds of union
carpenters that live and work in city of Boston. Uh carpenters, we are in favor of this break and we simply want to remind the developer of the importance of hiring subcontractors that meet community standards and play by the rules and giving the opportunity to our
Boston residents to go to work in this project. Thank you. >> Thanks. And and we one more person in the attend section. I think Alysia, I'm not sure if you are >> open. Ashley >> and Ashley. Yes.
>> Ashley from >> Thank you. Um Council F would like to go on record in opposition. Um, in his opinion, it is critical that community standards be entered to in the city of Boston so that women and people of color are provided respect and opportunity in
the construction industry. Additionally, residents have expressed concerns about accessibility of the sidewalks on Chandler Street. It is critical that the city's sidewalks are accessible for all neighbors, including our seniors, person with disabilities, and young families with strollers. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Madam Chair. No additional comments. >> Okay. Any other questions from the board? May I have a motion? >> I do. I would really like to hear Go ahead. >> I would really like to hear the applicant respond to councelor Fund's
concerns. >> Absolutely, Mr. Darner. Yes. Uh we're certainly uh committed to hiring a diverse and local workforce and that is in process. We've had several conversations uh across really all the trades about about this and moving forward working together. Additionally,
I did mention in my presentation, but again, just for the record, part of the mitigation of this project is to actually improve the accessibility along Chandler Street. Uh we nothing in this project should diminish any accessible standards or or make it harder for people with strollers or in wheelchairs uh to move around. We're actually
improving again down by our entrance to the parking facility, not only the driveway, but also the abuing uh sidewalk. So, it is now not accessible to go down Chandler Street all the way to the park and at the completion of this project it will be. So, we're uh in recognition of councelor Flynn's
comments and hopefully are responding to them by uh actually improving the accessibility and not doing anything to harm it. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Any other questions from the board? >> May I have a motion? M
go ahead. Sorry. >> I'll make a motion of approval. >> There a second. >> Second. >> Mr. Stebridge. >> Yeah. >> Mr. Valencia. >> Yes. >> Miss Turner. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Langum. >> Yes. >> Mr. Collins. >> Yes. >> Miss Ponado. >> Yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. Good luck. >> Thank you very much and happy holidays. >> Next we have case BOA 174
1777 with the address of 183 St. Mal Street the applicants andor the representative they please to the board. >> Yes. Thank you Mr. Stebridge. Good afternoon madam chair members of the board. We're actually going to be
seeking a deferral for this project. The proponent is looking to schedule an advisory hearing with Landmarks to get a better idea of how they feel about the project and any insights that they might have into its design. So, we're just looking for a deferral. >> Hey,
February 24th. >> Yep, that works. >> Okay. With that, may I have a motion? >> Motion to defer to February 24th. May >> I have a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Stbridge? >> Yes.
Mr. Valencia, >> yes. >> Miss Turner, >> yes. >> Mr. Langum, >> yes. >> Mr. Collins, >> yes. >> Miss Pado, >> yes. >> Chair votes, yes. Motion carries. See
you then. >> Thank you. Thank you very much. Next we have case BOA 171 0678 with the address of 391 Anna Street if
the applicant andor their representative present they please forth. Uh good afternoon, Madame Chairwoman, members of the board. Attorney William Ferolo on behalf of the applicant uh which is the uh Fericano family who uh
built out this restaurant in 2020 in a property owned by uh uh the wife uh and uh just in time after expending a considerable amount of money in time uh co came along and the restaurant wasn't
able to initially open. Uh since that time uh the outdoor dining program has allowed relief uh for restaurants uh first for COVID and and now as part of the city fabric of having outdoor dining. Uh outdoor dining has existed at
the location now for three years uh very successfully. Uh it is on uh private property uh that uh uh the individuals have been using. Uh due to the fact that there's 38 uh seasonal seats, uh the
outdoor dining program is requested uh that this appear before zoning for the conditional use as an expansion of premises. Um we submit to you that it's been very successful for the time that has been used. uh very wellreceived and
no issues with regard to service uh interference with the community. Uh with that, we'd uh ask you to approve this application for the conditional use. >> Thank you. Are there questions from the board? >> Hearing none, may have public testimony.
>> Hello, Madam Chair, members of the board. My name is Eva Jones representing the mayor's office and neighborhood services regarding 391 handover speed. Our office defers to the board's judgment. The mayor's office of neighborhood services does not run a community process for outdoor dining proposals and this falls within the purview of the mayor's office of small
business and economic inclusion cabinet. Uh we will defer to the board's judgment. Thank you everyone for your time and consideration. >> Thank you. Next we have Gabriela Ramirez from Council Kleta. >> Good afternoon madam chair, members of
the board. Gabriela Ramirez here on behalf of Boston City Councelor Gabriela Ka Sapata. At this time, the council would like to go on the record in support of this proposal. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Madame Chair. There are no additional comments. >> Okay. With that, may I have a motion?
>> I put forward a motion of approval. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Stebridge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia? >> Yes. >> Miss Turner? >> Yes. >> Mr. Langum?
>> Yes. Mr. Collins, >> yes. >> Miss Bonado, >> yes. Chair votes yes. The motion carries. Good luck. >> Thank you very much and happy holidays. >> Next, we have case BOA 1770252
with the address of 94 96 Endicott Street. The applicant and their representative present. Please explain to the board. >> Good afternoon, madam chair and members of the board. My name is Jeff Saris, the architect on 9496 Endicott Street. The
project proposes converting a firstf floor existing ice cream shop which has been long closed into a residential unit and the floors above are existing two beds, two baths to be renovated as well. The application is looking for a relief
for F which we are over in the existing and for usable open space which this is a north end lot zero lot line so we don't have any usable open space right now and uh and for the F we just wanted
to confirm that we are not increasing the square footage or finishing the basement this is an existing nonconformity thank Thank you. Question from the boarding none. May I public testimony. >> Hello madam chair, members of the board. My name is Eva Jones representing the
mayor's office and neighborhood services regarding 94 to 96 Endicott Street. Our office defers to the board's judgment. A community process was conducted including an owners meeting held on 91625 that was not attended by any community members and both civic associations new and unique have
reviewed the proposal and express support. At this time the mayor's office of neighbor services defers to the board's judgment. Thank you everyone for your time and consideration. >> Thank you. >> Next would be Gabriella Ramirez. >> Good afternoon madam chair members of the board. Gabriel Ramirez here on
behalf of Boston City Council Gabriela Sata. At this time, the council would like to go in the record in support of this proposal. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Madame Chair. There are no additional comments. >> Okay. With that, may I have a motion?
>> I do actually have a question. Um, it seems like this residence or this um space is vulnerable to flooding. Can somebody speak to that? >> Um, it says the note says it's located within the coastal flood resilience overlay district.
We weren't flagged as being within the flood risk district. So we might just be right outside of it. >> You were not flagged. You said >> not flagged. That's correct. >> Okay. Does Mr. Hampton to speak to this? >> Yeah.
>> Uh thank you, Madam Chair, members of the board. Uh Jeff Hampton, City of Boston Planning Department. They weren't flagged for it because it's not an article 80 project. However, um the property itself and we do acknowledge that there is no extension of living space and bedrooms into the basement,
but the property itself is far below the design flood elevation uh that has been established. So that is why we are opposed to it because even though there is no basement living space, property itself is below the flood elevation and that's why we're recommending denial.
They weren't cited again because they weren't an article 80 project. >> And Mr. Hampton, not sure you know the answer to this, but it seems like there are already other, you know, ground level units all up and down. >> Yeah, we acknowledge that Endicott has
that, but this is from when we started doing these recommendations no matter what part of the city it is with the design flood elevations. We've been very consistent um with opposing new residential uh spaces uh in the design
below the design flood elevation including ones uh around the corner on North Washington Street that have been here this year. So >> thank you. And can I ask the applicant what would be the alternative use for this space?
>> Um not sure because commercial's prohibited in this zone. Thank you. Any other questions from the board? May I have a motion? >> I'll make a motion to approve.
>> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Stebridge? >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia? >> Yes. >> Miss Turner? >> Yes. >> Mr. Langum?
>> Yes. >> Mr. Collins. >> Yes. >> Miss Ponado. >> Um, I'm going to vote no for consistency reasons. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. Good luck.
>> Thank you. >> At this time, we'll move on to the red discussion cases scheduled for 11:30 a.m. That will go right to the cases. The first two of which are companion cases and our case BOA
1777 6730 with the address of 706 Metropolitan Avenue. Along with that, we have case BOA172 0983
with the address of 704 Metropolitan Avenue. If the applicant andor their representative is present, would they please explain? >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Stembridge. Madam Chair, members of the board, attorney Ryan Spitz without Morancey, business
address of 168H Street, First Floor, South Boston. Uh joining me today from the development team is Andrew Shettna and the project architect, Eric Zapper. This proposal seeks to erect a new three-story 6-unit residential building with parking on a vacant lot consisting
of approximately 6,600 square ft within this area of Metropolitan A. Other properties range from a single family to six unit structures as well as two to three stories, making the proposed use contextually appropriate. First floor will consist of units one and unit two,
both two-bedroom units ranging at approximately 140 square ft. Um, Mr. Ambassador, if I could just trouble you to continue scrolling uh through the drawings as I go through uh our discussion. Uh, second floor will consist of units three and unit 4. Both
two-bedroom units ranging again approximately 1,50 ft². The third floor will consist of units five and unit 6. Both two-bedroom units again ranging at approximately,50 ft². Units three through six will all have 105 ft rear
balcony and a 59 ft deck in the front. We have violations for the use as we're proposing six units in a 2F subd district which is consistent uh within this neighborhood as well. Uh we have an ins insufficient lot size as the site consists of 6,600 ft as the code
requires 8,000 square ft but similar in scale to the surrounding neighborhood. We have a floor area ratio violation as the proposal calls for a 1.11 as compared to a.5 which is compliant. We have a height violation. The proposal calls for three stories. 2 and 1/2
stories is compliant within this subject within the subdist but we are compliant as far as the feet is required. We have an open space violation. Uh what we're required is a very high uh within this subdist. 1750 square ft per unit and the
proposal calls for 164 square ft per dwelling, but again uh is very consistent with the open space of some of these other properties and the surrounding context. Uh we have a front yard violation code requires 20 ft and the proposal calls for 13 ft 2 in but again comparable with other properties
on this side of the block. We have a sideyard violation 10 ft is required by code. This proposal has a setback of six feet on the left side that matches the the sideyard dimensions on the neighboring properties. The right side of the driveway is non-conforming due to the shared driveway, but if a driveway
was entirely on this parcel, then there would be no violation. We have a rear yard insufficiency. 40 ft is required by the code. The proposal calls for 39 ft 2 in. Parking violation proposal provides six parking spaces and the zoning calls for
2.0 spaces per dwelling. However, this proposal is aligned with the mayor's initiative of reducing dependency on private vehicles. Also, that we do have a violation for the design as the proposal uses some of the land of the abuing property at 706 Metropolitan. An easement has been recorded and is in
place prior to this proposal being proposed here today. This has also triggered the need of relief for the sister application of 706 Metropolitan A which requires the release of a conditional use permit for the non-conforming use change and due to the easement of record for the parking
access. Even though this project exceeds some of the dimensional regulations for the site, it adds housing units while maintaining the small footprint of the parcel while assisting with the city's planning goal of increasing the housing supply. Uh further, it is consistent with the planning department's recommendation of approval. Uh, Madam
Chair, prior to sending it back over to you to open it up for any questions or comments from the board, I just like to notate uh we did have a few neighbors uh here that were present uh willing to speak in support. I'm not quite sure how many are here remaining today considering that we are way behind in
schedule. Uh so I just want to make that known. Uh but we did submit a few letters in support. So again u thank you for your time and I'm going to turn it back over to you, Madam Chair. >> Thank you. Are there questions from the board? Hearing none. May I follow testimony?
>> Madame chair and members of the board. For the record, my name is Jeremy Benbury. I'm the hide park community engagement specialist for the office of neighborhood services. The applicant has completed the community process which consisted of an abutis meeting facilitated on July 16th whereas raised concerns regarding the change from four
stories and eight units to three stories and six units referencing the original refusal letter. Other concerns for the sideyard setback, excessive requested variances, open space, affordability, ownership, and removal of trees on the property. No opposition was voiced during the meeting, but opponents
remained concerned that the six units may still be too many. Next, an opponent moved forward and presented to High Park Neighborhood Association who voted to oppose the proposal. The association felt it was too many units for their lot of land, not enough parking, and too many violations. To date, our office has
received two letters of support support uh for the improvement of the property to a six unit and with six parking spaces. Thank you for your time and the mayor's office of neighbor services would like to defer to the board for their judgment. >> Next, we have people from the 10
section. Charlie, you can >> Hey, good afternoon madam chair and member of the board. Uh my name is Charlie McDonald. I represent the owners uh at 693 Metropolitan F. Um we are in you know full complete support of this
project. Um we believe that will add tremendous value to the neighborhood. Um and uh you know that the street uh neighborhood does does need a face and I think that this would uh um you know bring you know some good value to uh to
that street in the neighborhood. Um yeah just full support. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next, we have the person with the number 6176345. >> Good afternoon, Madam Chair and members of the board. Craig Martin with the
Hypoc Neighborhood Association. Um, we have had u the meeting in our neighborhood association uh with unanimous um opposition to the density of this location. um this lot size is too small for a two family for which
it's zoned. We would even though it would require zoning relief the port a two family construction fight the zoning relief um but the six units is too much. Um and the abutters have the longtime abutters have expressed the concern over and over again with that neighborhood
that this is too close. There's no the setbacks are too small in the density too much site. Um, again, it's too small. This lot size is too small for a two family. if we require a 20,000 square foot parcel to accommodate the
six units. Um if the board does indeed choose to support uh to um approve this, we would ask that a proviso be put in to save the only mature tree on this parcel which is
provides the canopy to the adjoining the two adjoining parcels as well as this um tree. There's a one parking space that that they're they're taking down this street for and that one parking space could easily be move maneuvered to
another location to this parking lot. Save that tree. We ask that you please put that as a proviso. >> Thank you. >> Also, thank you. If if if there was room for one other proviso, we would prefer the roof decks not be included on this
in this design. Um but the most important provisor is the trees. I thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. And the last person is Chantel Turner. >> Hi, good afternoon. My name is Shante Turner. I live at 706 Metropolitan AB
and I am in support uh of the project. >> Thank you. >> Sorry. Actually, there there now there are three more people who raised a hand. Okay. >> Okay. We have um
Alexandra Ventura. >> Yes. Hi, good afternoon. My name is Alexandra Ventura and I am actually a neighbor. I live at 107 Arlington Street and um I'm here in support of the project. I do believe that it would be a
positive addition to the neighborhood. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Next we have um John Jones Collins. >> Mr. Collins, are you speaking?
>> I don't know what's happening. >> Okay. Well, would the applicant like to address the questions around the tree and the roof decks? Yes. So the you know the the owners would be happy u to preserve that
existing tree itself. So um I don't think that's really a big issue in that sense. Um happy to kind of work around uh preserving that tree. Um secondly is is we're hearing from Mr. Martin um who's just a part of the civic association. He's not in a butter to
this proposal at all. Um we'd like to notate that our you know our proposal is well aligned with the planning department's recommendation approval um and is consistent with the surrounding um the context of the neighborhood as well. Um and as you heard from many of
the abuters uh on this street as well as the letters of support uh seems that to be that we do have uh some support coming from the neighborhood as well. >> Thank you. Any other questions from the board? May I have a motion?
>> I put motion of approval. >> There second. >> Mr. Stebridge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencio. >> Yes. >> Miss Turner. >> Yes. >> Mr. Langum.
>> Yes. >> Mr. Collins. >> Yes. >> Miss Bonado. >> Yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. Good luck. >> Thank you. >> Next, we have >> I I was going to I was looking up
Spanish name. >> Next, we have two more companion cases. The first one is case BOA 1690861 with the address of 122 Wood Avenue.
Along with that we have case BO8690859 with the address of 120 Wood Avenue. If the applicant andor the representative present, would they please explain the cases to the board? >> Yes. Um good afternoon madam chair, members of the board. My name is Eileen
Rosa. I am the residential designer and primary applicant uh for these applications representing the property owners uh which is uh the Torres family who have owned this property for approximately seven years now. Um we are
proposing a lot subdivision for the property located at 122 Wood. It's a corner lot at Woodaff and Roskinddale Road. The existing lot measures 7,133 square ft and currently contains a two
family dwelling uh with uh where they have one of these units leased with a section 8 uh section 8 voucher. Uh the intent of this proposal is uh to subdivide the property to create a new
lot of approximately 3,181 square ft um under the address of uh 120 wood a and to construct a new two family residential building. So you can scroll
down to the floor plans while I speak so I can briefly uh describe the units. Uh this proposed building will consist of two dwelling units. Um unit one will occupy the first floor and the basement
totaling approximately 1,200 square ft and will include two bedrooms and two bathrooms. Unit two. If we go through the floor plans, um you'll see it will be occupied on the second floor and the
attic level totaling approximately 1,329 square ft. And it will also include two bedrooms and two bathrooms. Um, if we can go up to the plot plan. Scroll up to
the plot plan with the next. Yeah. So, I just scroll up for the first page, please. Yeah. Which is the plot plan where we show the existing and proposed. Yeah, there it is. Yeah. So, um, during the neighborhood meeting, uh, we
received feedback and concerns regarding parking. In response, we promptly revised the plans back in October to improve these concerns. The revised proposal includes one parking space per unit for both buildings accessed through
the a proposed easement at the existing carpet loss road. Um the exterior now if we can scroll to the next page. Um the exterior of the proposed building was carefully developed to ensure it
blends with the surrounding neighborhood context. We are proposing fiber cement sighting to enhance durability and provide fire resistant characteristics consistent with materials typically recommended by the BPDA. Um I would like to clarify uh the matter
of the rear yard setback. Um if we go up back to the plot plan, uh the minimum required setback in this zone in district is 20 ft. Uh while the proposed building comes to approximately 31 ft at the closest point to the rear property
line. So we just wanted to respectfully note that this condition should not be characterized as an insufficient rear setback violation since it was uh called out. Uh we believe this proposal thoughtfully provides contextual and responsible residential development and
we respectfully request the board's consideration. We're also looking forward to working in combination with the BPDA to address any additional improvements as needed. So that's all we have to present and we'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. Ma'am, are there questions from the
board? >> Hearing none, may I have public testimony? Madam chair and members of the board, for the record, my name is Jeremy Benbury. I'm the Hide Park community engagement specialist for the Office of Neighborhood Services. The applicant has completed the community process which consisted of an abundance meeting facilitated on April 14th that
was very lightly attended where concern was voiced regarding the size of the parcel for two structures in part working with the board to the proposal setting concerns from the current occupancy sanitation and
road control and providing off street parking. To date, our office has received a list of concerns our office forwarded to the zoning board of maintaining the opposed theme, including the need for the current property to create off- streetet parking and a request for inspection stating that three unrelated people have separate rooms with internet service in the
basement. To date, our office has received two letters of opposition. Again, maintaining the previously mentioned opposed theme. Thank you for your time in the mayor's office of neighborhood services. Would like to defer to the vote for the judgment. >> Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. There are no additional comments.
May I have a motion? >> I'll make a motion of approval. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Spe, >> yeah. >> Mr. Vonia, >> yes. >> Miss Turner,
>> no. >> Mr. Langum? >> Yes. Mr. Collins, >> yes. >> Miss Ponado, >> yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. >> You happy holidays.
>> Good luck. >> Next, we have case BOA 176903. the address of 26 Win Street. The applicants and their representative, please explain to the floor. I am Mr.
Secretary. Uh hello, Madam Chair, members of the board. Again, this is Mike Ross, attorney with the law firm, Prince International Place. I'm here with the owner of the property, Francis Hawai. Uh this is a proposal to add a twostory ADU addition uh to the existing
one family home. Uh this addition is consistent with other additions in the neighborhood will make better utilization of the lot and open space on the property. Uh the applicant appeared before the ZBA. Madam Chair, you were there uh subcommittee on October 23rd,
but it was um correctly pointed out at the time by member Barza that the use category of an ADU when in a bumpout condition needs to be captured as a use. Uh so we have since uh uh done that and
uh edited the the refusal or ISD rather edited the refusal. Uh and there was also a comment at that subcommittee hearing uh from an abuter uh requesting that we provide a uh increase to our rear yard setback at least consistent
with the existing shed which we have now done. U m um Mr. or madame ambassador. I think it's madam ambassador or ambassador if you could please um go to page three of the site plan page. Uh yeah, that works. Thank you. Sorry,
it's very small on my screen. As you can see is this is the revised site plan. You can see the bubbled area in the rear of the building. at the top of the screen. Um it it shows how first of all this addition will line up behind the
existing house and the addition will place that existing shed and pathway I referenced so that it consolidates all of the remaining open space to the left side of the rear yard thereby optimizing
the space for maximum usage. And now the rear yard has been increased as I mentioned to five feet which is slightly greater than where the existing shed sits. Next slide please. We wanted to show you this context photo
slide uh to show how other rear yards within this immediate block are utilized and um how there are various additions as well as hardcaping within their rear yards. Uh the BBD letter actually
referenced this said the scale and form of additions are consistent with patterns of expansion already present in the neighborhood. Uh the the red shows where there's a lack of uh dimensional conformity within existing parcels. And
then we did site this house in the lower lefthand corner. It's 36 Hopedale Street. It's almost exactly the same addition that we're proposing. Uh it was approved by this board in 2018. Next slide, please. Here's an architectural site plan. Uh
shows the first floor plan uh with the additional uh bedroom, office, bath, and kitchen off the rear. Note how it is, uh behind the existing structure. Next slide, please.
This slide references the zoning refusal. the zoning relief we're seeking the the refuse as I mentioned was amended um for the ADU due to the bumpout um we were originally cited for dimensional violations F sideyard rear
yard for this proposal uh BBDA also mentioned in their letter that these are consistent uh remain in character with the surrounding block um and then I did want to point out just on that slide if you could go back Open space is not one of the violations that
we received. It's not it's not in this category of the dimensional um table, but uh we actually wind up increasing the open space from 495 to 520 simply by reorganizing uh that that rear yard. So it's actually
a net increase of open space which is a good result. Next slide please. Um so these are the floor plans. The the upper the upper slide is the second floor. This is just a two-story structure. Um shows the the new
structure with a three-bedroom, office, second bath. And then the lower the lower SL um plan shows I already showed you the first floor which has the bedroom, office, bath and kitchen area. Uh elevation please. Next slide.
And the first elevation just shows how the addition sits behind and below the height of the exist. Actually, you can go to the second elevation if you'd like, ambassador. Yeah, you can kind of see how the uh existing structure sits behind and below and it's within the existing height
limits of the code. We submitted six letters of support. Mentioned the BPDA is recommending approval. I'll pause there if there any questions. Thank you. Are there questions from the board? Hearing none, mayor. Public testimony.
>> Yes. Sigy Johnson with the mayor's office of neighborhood services. This applicant completed the community process. Our office hosted a Butters meeting on August 19th at which director Butters were opposed to the application. Butters felt the proposed setback in the zoning subdist that requires 30 ft was a substantial deficiency compared to what
was proposed. The Alustin Civic Association is in opposition. They also wanted the applicant to return to their associations and the chain were made that were described and the director has written letter of opposition that was forwarded to the board in October. With that background, our office defers
judgment to the board. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Next we have an Anthony Didoro. >> Yes. Uh good afternoon madam chair, members of the board. Tony Tidoro representing the Civic Association. Um
my major concern at this point is the community process uh to say it was robust is really uh an understatement so to speak. Uh the proponent appeared before the ACA on May 21st before they got their refusal letter before they got
their abuts letter. Um we they have not done a good job keeping us in the loop and uh the director buddies the people in the neighborhood since the November meeting when they were uh the proponents announced that there were changes that
needed to be made uh uh and advertised and what have you. Uh we never got a copy of the new plans. We never got a phone call about potential of having another abut meeting since things had changed. Uh the rear setback is a big
issue and and if there were changes made it there should have probably been another abuts meeting they never asked to come back to the ACA. So believe it or not, we are seeing these plans for the first time just five minutes ago and how an association can make an informed
judgment on a very critical project that has some precedent setting uh features to it uh in a very established owner occupied community. U I just don't know how we can do that. So uh we are even more in opposition than we were at the
beginning given the fact that we >> we have not been >> okay next we have the person with the name Eoto Eotto Edamorei I'm a director at number 24
and quite frankly this is the first time I've heard about all these changes uh and I'm quite surprised quite frankly that the rest of the neighborhood doesn't know about it either. So, I think they owe uh the neighbors as well
as the ACA another meeting. I am still concerned about the green space uh that is going to be even though that they're changing it. Um I think that there could be a storm water drain situation still
as they are still taking away some green space. Uh, one of my neighbors had talked to the chief of the fire department and they said that it would be difficult if another thing was built back there. Um, that they would not be
able to control the fires uh in the area. And then uh in this area by the way uh is probably 50 or 60 houses all wood uh and uh would um create a problem
uh in terms of um any of our homes being safe. Um so I I am definitely fully against this uh going forward for the lack of information from the proponent
and uh the other thing is uh one other item is at the present time now they're saying they're going to move in into the rear what's going to be in front. >> Thank you. Okay. Madam Chair, there are no additional.
>> Okay. Attorney Ross, would you like to address these concerns? >> Yeah, >> I would, please. Thank you. Um, you know, in terms of the community process, you know, the process is working exactly the way it's supposed to. We went to the meeting. We go to the AC I go to the ACA all the time. I'm happy to go there
anytime. We went there. We had a rear set deck of three. The the building was identical. Uh we were told that the neighbors wanted to see a further increase of the rear yard. I said we'll we'll do the best we can
and we increased it to five. We gave them another 2 ft which was where the shed was. The shed was actually at four. So we actually outperformed where the shed was. We showed it to the neighbor who made the direct um comment. Um, I don't know if we the
previous speaker uh who just spoke uh saw it, but I know that the the person who wasn't on the call here or did see it and had raised it directly. The neighbor went around, knocked on doors and showed it, but it's uh you know, in terms of the community process, it's working exactly like it did. We went to
the meeting. There's no it wasn't an addition. It was a decrease of what was previously there. We made it we made it better. terms of the open space comment, as I mentioned, we just we increased the open space. We increased the the green space in the backyard, not decreased it. So, the the previous comment about
removing green space is is just not true. And the the third point I'd make is that, you know, we're adding an addition that not my words, but the BPDA words said is consistent with the other buildings additions on their property.
We're we're merely doing what our neighbors did. We're doing so in a thoughtful way. So, you know, it's a thousand plus square foot addition uh to create an ADU in the back and we're, you know, we went through a number of meetings. We came back, we're at the
board here. We came back to re refuse it because of the use issue. Um, and then to get the rear yard brought in. Those are all changes made within the public process. Everyone's aware of those changes. Uh, they were advertised. They're put out. We had the meeting with the ACA. We talked to our neighbors.
owner is hands up. It looks like his hands up. Do do you want him to speak? >> Um, you have something to add that is the Yes. >> Yes, I do. Um, thank you, Madam Chair. Um, regarding the community communication, we've taken this to the
highest level from the very beginning of the project even before the ACA meeting. So we communicated with uh uh uh residents on Windham Street and Hope Street and we were fully aware that uh most of them the new neighbors are not a part of the or active participants of
ACA especially the one who just moved in such as the owner of 69 hope uh which is one of the others and the 10 Windham Street which they just moved in before about a month or two months before this hearing. So we took a different approach beyond the what's required for the AC
process. We knock on the door, show them the plan, get their signature which were presented to uh this hearing before. And we also want to uh add on top of what Mr. uh what Tony just mentioned that we are actively communicating with him and
uh we would believe it's unfair to mention that we failed to communicate as I personally reached out to um Tony on December 4th 2025 and we haven't heard back from him until yesterday 3:45 which uh he demanded us to uh defer and we
believe that is um at least a miscommunication not from our end as we have did everything we could and we follow the the ACA process communication with all the neighbors specifically our butters on Windham Street and Hope Street. >> Thank you.
>> Are there other questions from the board? >> May I have a motion? >> Sorry. I'll make a motion of approval. There >> a second. >> Mr. Stebridge. >> Yes. Mr. Valencia, >> yes.
>> Miss Turner, >> yes. >> Mr. Langum, >> yes. >> Mr. Collins, >> yes. >> Miss Bernado, >> yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. Good luck.
>> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> And happy holidays to everyone. >> Happy holidays. Happy holidays. Happy holidays. Happy holidays.