Boston zoning board of appeal hearing for May 19, 2026 is now in session. The 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 livereamed. 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 for connecting to this hearing is listed on today's hearing agenda, which is posted on the public notices page of the city's website, austin.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 this hearing as panelists and they will appear alongside
the presentation materials when speaking. Panelists are strongly encouraged to keep video on while presenting to the board. As with our in-person meetings, comments and support will be followed by comments and opposition. The order of comments is as follows. Elected officials,
representatives of elected officials, and members of the public. The chair may limit the number of people called upon to offer comment and the time for commenting as time constraints require. For that reason, the board prefers to hear from members of the public who are most impacted by 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 can provide their comment. In the interest of time and to ensure that you have enough time to do so, please raise your hand as soon as Mr. Stebridge reads the address into the
record. Do not raise your hand before the relevant address is called or the meeting host will not know to call on you at the appropriate time. We ask that you keep your comments brief and all public testimony will be limited to 90 seconds per speaker.
Okay, Mr. Stebridge. >> Good morning, Mr. Valencia. >> Good morning, Madam Chair. Present. >> Good morning, Miss Miss Turner. >> Good morning, Madam Chair. Present. >> Good morning, Miss Bed Brazzo. >> Good morning, Madam Chair. Present.
>> Good morning, Miss Panada. >> Good morning, Madam Chair. Present. Good morning, Mr. Collins. >> Good morning, Madam Chair. Present. >> Good morning, I'll turn it over to Mr. Stebridge. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Good morning to
the rest of the board members. We'll begin today's hearing with excuse the approval of a hearing scheduled for 9:30 a.m. These hearing minutes are from April 16th, April 28th, and May 5th of
this year. I'll make a motion of approve. >> May I have a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Stebridge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia? >> Yes. >> Miss Turner?
>> Yes. >> Miss Ba Barazza? >> Yes. >> Miss Ponado? >> Yes. >> Mr. Collins? >> Yes. >> Votes? Yes. The motion carries. Next, we'll move on to the extensions
scheduled for 9:30 a.m. All the extensions appear to be reasonable. Um, and should be could be supported. If there if anyone has any questions, I'll read them all and one after another and
then get can entertain the questions. Madam Chair, first we have case BOA 1563584 with the address of two Hillsboro Street. Next we have case BOA548022
with the address of 1029 Tox. Next we have case BOA 153 0242. The address of 152. Next we have K BOA
wonderful BOA 114 2276 with the address of 79 Brook Street. Next we have case BOA 155 01 07 the
address of 451 East 7th Street. Next we have case BOA 101 9011 with the address of 22 24. Next, next and finally we have case BOA
92 982 435 with the address of 193 which we'll have and those are the extension request there. >> Thank you Mr. Stbridge. Any questions
from the board? >> Gent shared about the last case 198 Avenue. If attorney small is here, I'm just uh wondering about this is the fifth uh extension. >> I wanted to ask attorney small about
this. And so the first question is when was this project approved? The first time attorney small. >> The project was originally approved in 2020, I believe. And since then, we was held up in litigation. There was a uh
property line dispute with the neighbor at 196 Woodro AB. So that was in land court uh for a little while but that has since been resolved but it wasn't it was it was challenged property line. >> Thank you. So at this moment the project
is ready to move forward. >> Project is ready to move forward with another extension. >> Excellent. Thank you very much. >> No problem. >> Questions answered. >> Thank you. With that, uh, may I have a motion to grant the extensions as requested? >> Motion to grant the extensions as
requested. >> Second. >> Thank you, Mr. Stembridge. >> Yeah. >> Mr. Valencia, >> yes. >> Miss Turner, >> yes. >> Miss Better Brazo? >> Yes. >> Miss Pado? >> Yes.
>> Mr. Collins? >> Yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. Next go to the recommendations schedu for 9:30 a.m. These are recommendations from the recent subcommittee meeting. Um they were all
approved one with the proviso which I would point out. First we have Kate Ba 1797694 with the address of 443 Street which was approved. Next we have
case BOA 1813812 with the address of 59 Belleview Bill Road which was approved. Next was case BOA 1823043 with the address of 15 Mercury Hill
Road. This was approved with proposal for site planning view by by the Boston planning department. And finally, we have the participant um have case BOA 172164
with the address of 2 to 20 Fairmont Aston. Madam Chair, those are the results from the sub. >> Thank you. Any questions from the board? May have a motion.
>> Motion to approve the subcommittee recommendations. May I have a second? >> Second. >> Menbridge. >> Yeah. >> Mr. Valencia. >> Yes. >> Miss Turner. >> Yes. >> Miss Barza.
>> Yes. >> Miss Panado. >> Yes. >> Mr. Collins. >> Yes. >> Chairs. Yes. Motion carries. With that, move on to the hearing schedule for 9:30 a.m. At this time,
we'll ask if there are any request for withdrawals or deferrals from the 9:30 a.m. time frame. Hopefully, it will be but hearing now with two weeks. Um
so the first case in this case BOA1837594 with the address of 94 to 94B park. If the applicants answer their their representative presence, they please explain to the court.
I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I couldn't hear you clearly. Board, >> are you the applicant? >> Yes, I am. >> Great. Can you state your name and address for the record and please proceed? >> Yes. My name is James Greer. address is 4255 Washington Street, Rosendale, Mass.
>> Okay. >> Um Yeah. Thank you. >> Okay. Um so we've we've gone through a uh very long community process here to um construct a threeunit building. Uh
this project had started off in its in its primary iteration or first iteration as a six-unit structure. And after a very long community process and working um side by side with the neighbors uh came to realize that the
density may have been too large for this lot. Uh this is a vacant parcel that's been vacant uh for quite some time. And um so what we had done was we went and um worked with did a very long
community process and decided to scale this back. And so what we're designing here is we're designing a three-unit parcel uh I mean a three-unit uh townhouse building side by side um under
a lot of um guidance from the neighborhood as far as making into one simple building um uh creating adequate parking space. um being able to
uh reduce the sort of density and scale as far as the roof by creating a Mansard structure here. Um to be able to um really make it fit within the neighborhood character of
the site. And um we're we're looking to uh get approved for a three-unit dwelling here. questions from the board. >> Yes, I have a couple of questions. Um,
is the owner planning to live on this property? >> No, not currently. >> No. Okay. And then, um, I saw that some neighbors had concerns about flooding. Do you have anything to say, uh, in regards to that? I know that we're going
to be pursuing um um approval from Boston Water and Sewer Commission after this. So, we had actually taken that into great consideration. Obviously, this is going to be through state and federal law that we have to manage all the storm water on
site. Um so, we will be mitigating any type of storm water and runoff as well. The other thing too is the way that we've designed the site is to go with the natural grade of the site as well. So um bringing the building forward towards
the build towards the street and allowing it to to gl to uh slope down as well. In addition to that, uh that's another reason why we didn't add any underground parking just due to the fact that it would have to change the grade
significantly of the site and we'd have to bring a lot of fill in and raise it. So we didn't want to really disturb the natural the natural grade of the site. So uh we designed it this way um to
really mitigate storm water and runoff and flooding. And we gone through a very large uh a very long uh design process with the community at several meetings uh outside of uh the scheduled means
that we have a neighborhood council and um have shown them at least four different iterations of this plan. >> Okay. Thank you. And then lastly, can you just walk us through um the parking plan once again? >> Yes. >> Thank you.
Um, parking has been a major concern. And so what we did here was that we really took um, parking into consideration specifically for the neighborhood because that's a tighter street. What we've done here is that we've paved back a little bit so that we
can have two parking spaces per unit. It's a three-unit building. We feel as if three parking spaces per unit would really be sufficed for this for this site specifically just due to parking being really tight for the street and not to disturb uh the neighborhood. With
being a church across the street, Sundays is a is a day that um there's high traffic there. when we're thinking through snow and snow removal, having all that parking offsite and being in allowing two parking spaces per unit is
is something at the request of of the neighborhood and and we fully agree with them regarding that. >> Thank you. >> Can you confirm is this um condos or uh rentals? >> It is condos. >> Condos. Thank you. Any other questions from the board?
>> To piggy back on Mr. Turner's uh comment about the parking. Did you receive any feedback from the planning department about how much space you are allocating for parking and driveway? Just looking at the site plan, it looks like you are
using probably more than 30% of the whole um site for parking and pavement. So, did you get any feedback about reducing parking or um reorganizing the parking to provide
more open space? Um we we didn't we didn't get any um provision from the planning department. Um, but really what we were thinking through is really for the neighborhood and we what we did was we talked we had
some feedback from neighborhood council and also uh the neighbors to to design the parking plan and due to the fact that this is a fairly long site and larger site um the whole back area
will remain open space. >> Thank you. with that may I public >> I have one more is your architect on by any chance >> he is not on he was to
>> okay um I think it's a pretty you know straightforward project you have a tremendous amount of site work on the on the lot with the amount of trees that you have um but I the only thing that I would say in to like work with the
neighborhood's character is that the front facade saw almost looks like the back of the building. And >> um and you know, I'm not sure if I should recommend like a BPD design review just for the kind of the front
>> um because I know that you've gone through a very elaborate process. But, you know, just by switching the stairs uh to the other side and really having the kitchen face to front, you'll be able to have better kind of symmetry with windows
>> to work with the residential frontage. >> Um, so it's not necessarily a a zoning, but it's more of the character of the neighborhood. Uh, but I just wanted to make that comment to my colleagues. Uh, right now it's just the front looks like
the back of the building. Yeah, we we'd definitely be amendable to u working through that front facade more to make it work. >> Yeah. Yeah. That way that way you're not putting all the windows at the corner because you're let you're trying to accommodate
your your stair stairwell. I think you could do it. You can have it more um you know the kitchen space, the social space out to the front. Okay. No further questions. Thanks. >> Thank you. With that, may I have public testimony? Madame Chair and board member Sigy Johnson with the Office of
Neighborhood Services. This petitioner has completed the community process. Her office hosted an abuters meeting on June 9th, 2025 for a different version of this proposal which was very lightly attended but at which direct a direct a butter expressed opposition due to density. The applicant then made a
number of changes reducing the density and met with the Butters privately as well as three times with the West Robury neighborhood council which ultimately voted to support this proposal but requested a proviso that there be sufficient screening on both sides of the property. That background ons defers
judgment to the board. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Next we have Frank. >> Thank you. Uh Frank Holmes here um own the property with my siblings at 92 Rockland Street. So director Butter uh to the property. Um I did submit a
letter to the to the board uh last night. I'm I'm hoping that that's been received. But just very briefly could summarize u we' had uh several discussions um with uh Mr. Gary
regarding uh ownership of the property. We requested that there be a condition um if any decision that the ZBA makes that the that the units be owner occupied and that they're um that uh the
documents for the condo include a lockin provision uh for 25 years. So that they will need to be owner occupied for a minimum of 25 years and that can't be changed. We would request that that lock in provision, you know, be a condition
of any decision the ZBA make. Um, second, two other points. Uh, briefly we did raise at or I raised at the neighborhood council meeting. I I didn't see listed as part of the relief being requested here um for use as a
multifamily. It's my understanding that the zoning here is for single family residential. And so the neighborhood council didn't feel that that was um to be addressed uh by them. But I I'm asking the question
here. I I believe that that relief is also required. And then my third point is in discussions with Mr. Gary, we had um in consistent with the council's recommendation for screening, we had
requested uh that he u provide a budget for us for our property um for landscaping. Uh and I just want to I'd like to hear from James, you know, uh I sent you an email yesterday, James, regarding the amount of that. I I not
don't know if you can comment if you are committing to what we're asking for here. Our support is um dependent on on that. >> Thank you. >> Um so Frank, I I did actually respond to your email.
>> Okay. I didn't see that. Sorry about that. >> And we did commit to um doing that. As we said, we were we worked really um elaborately and a very long process with the neighbors and we were amendable to that. We understand that screening was
important to you. So, we did concede to um uh fund that budget towards that. So, we did email you and we we responded to that. >> Thank you. I I didn't see that. >> Any other comments? Any other raised hands? >> Also, pardon that relief.
>> I'm sorry, sir. >> Okay. Sorry, >> we don't have additional comments. >> Any other response from the applicant? >> Uh, yes. Regarding the the relief, uh, I do believe when looking at my zoning code refusal letter, the one that was
has been update that has been updated and submitted to the board, um, that use variance is listed as one of the violations. >> Thank you. Any other questions from the board? May I have a motion?
>> Make a motion to approve. >> Is there a second? >> Mr. Stembridge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia? >> Yes. >> Miss Turner? >> Yes. >> Miss Bavarza?
>> Yes. >> Miss Panado? >> Yes. >> Mr. Collins? >> Yes. >> Chair votes? Yes. The motion carries. Thank you. >> Next we have KOA
1805281 with the address of 101 Edge Mir Road. It's the applicants and the representative are present. Would they please respect the case of the board? >> Uh good morning madam chairman. Madam chairman I'm apologize that members of the board. My name is attorney Francis
Adams with a business address of 350 West Broadway in Boston, Mass. Um, I represent the owners of the vacant land at 101 Engineer Road in West Roberry. Uh, the property is located in the multifamily residential subdist which
allows townhouse development as well as other properties. Um, this application is to construct a two town houses, attached town houses on a vacant parcel of land. There has never been any development on the parcel. Uh the lot size of the parcel is 60 almost 6,200
square ft². Each townhouse will be approximately 31 ft high. Uh three bedroomedroom two bath um over uh grade slab uh parking with the first and second floor and an unfinished attic. Um the application is consistent with the
Boston planning goals and imagine Boston 2030 which is promoting infill development. As I said, this has been a vacant parcel of land. Um, for the for the members of of the board, uh, the property is surrounded almost entirely on the left and rear by a a Jewish
cemetery association and to the right there is an abutter property. Um, this edge road is a long road that leads uh into a housing development. at the end of the road. This particular side of the road, as I said, there's no uh residential development after the
property on the right hand side. Uh we are seeking relief for five uh very violations. Uh F is excessive. Height is excessive only because of the number of stories. Um this is a 2 and 1/2 story district, but the height of the property is uh 31 ft, which is well below the 35
ft limit. uh sideyard is insufficient usable open space and the use is forbidden. Uh for the record, the use is forbidden because the property is located in a 1 F6000 district. As I said though, this is uh consistent with the it's in an MFR multif family residential
subd district which allows for rowhouse or townhouse development. Um just a couple of points. Um as I said, we met we had a a good community process. We met with the uh Butters and the West Roberry Neighborhood Council. voted to support the project. We also are aware
of the planning department recommendation for approval. Um uh the only other issue again is the height which we said it's it's it's only a height violation because it's two and a half stories not not of any any height of the property. Uh we believe this is a
reasonable development consistent with the mayor's goal uh to create infill housing on vacant lots of land and it's consistent with the surrounding housing stock. There are variations of housing, one family, two family, as well as multif family large apartment buildings
at the end of Edgeir Road. Uh we believe this is a good application. We're using not using the whole whole lot. There's going to be green space. There's going to be rear yards and there's also going to be rear decks to increase the uh open space for each of the two units. Um and
parking for the units will be at grade and under the building. So there'll be no uh parking in the front of the property. Um with that uh we will uh take any questions from the board. >> Thank you. Are there any questions from the board?
>> Yes. Um can you walk us through the curb cut for the parking? >> Yes. So um that's one of the planning uh department's recommendation. Uh it was for design review consistent. Uh they they are recommending that there only be one curb cut. There is no curb cut on on
on Edgemere Road right now. This is a vacant parcel of land. So, we are familiar with the planning's recommendation. My client is amendable to having a single curb cut which will branch off to the left in the right to allow access uh to the property.
>> Thank you. Any other questions? May have public testimony. >> Madame chair and board members Johnson with the office of neighborhood services petitioners completed the community process. Her office hosted an abut butters meeting on January 27th at which one abutter raised questions but no
opinions were stated and a butter at number 95 was not able to attend the meeting but wrote a letter of opposition to our office which was forwarded to the board. The applicant met with the West Rockbury neighborhood council which voted to support this application. With that background, ONS defer his judgment
to the board. Thank you. >> Next we we have Rachel. Rachel. >> Hi. Yes. Can you hear me? Yes, ma'am. >> Thank you. Um I live at 95 Edgeir Road. I am right next door to where um the
proposed building is. And my concern is that this is an overbuild for the size of the lot. And I have several old trees along the along the fence line on my property and I've concerned about damage to those trees with an overbuild.
>> Thank you, >> Madam Chair. will have additional comments. >> Can the applicant address all of that feedback? >> Sure. Um, thank you. Um, we we're not aware of uh the tree line, but as as the board may know, we we will not be able
to um attach or touch anyone's trees uh on their own lot. I we believe this application is a very reasonable development for a 6200 foot lot. Um I at the at the meetings that we had with the
community group we did a analysis of the surrounding properties in the average that's all of Edgeir road as well as Willow Street and Dninnesota which about the you know surround this area and the average square foot is approximately 3600 for all of the properties in that
area which is just about what we're proposing here. We don't believe at all that it's a an overreach. It's a two and a half story building. And on vacant land, it's uh consistent with the housing stock as the planning department states in their recommendation. It's it's very consistent with the size and
scope of all the surrounding properties. And again, with respect to the trees, we have no problem working with the butter if there's a concern with the trees. This has not been raised as an issue to us. But respectfully, if there's an issue with trees, we'll work with the butter to make sure that they're pruned and trimmed and we don't bother them.
>> Thank you. Any other questions from the board? May I have a motion? >> Motion for approval with a proviso that the plans be submitted to the planning department for design review with a focus on consolidating the singular curb
cut on the lot that preserves maneuverability. Is >> there a second? >> Thank you, Mr. Stumbridge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia. >> Yes. >> Miss Turner. >> Yes. >> Miss Better Braza? >> Yes.
Miss Panado, >> yes. >> Mr. Collins, >> yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. >> Thank you, members. Appreciate it. >> Next, we have case BOA1806951
with the address of 55 to 57 St. Marksville. The applicant andor their representative are present. With that, please splice to the board. >> Thank you, Mr. Stinbridge. Madam Chair, members of the board, my name is Kyle Smith of Statera Law, business address
of 359 Newbury Street in Boston's Back Bay. I do have the owner on uh the call as well in the project architect. Uh we have a pre-existing two family uh that is currently occupied by the owner's two sons. The proposal is merely to add
dormers to the current third floor to add uh usable living space to create a third unit uh 934 net additional square ft three bed one bath uh increasing a pre-existing non-conforming F of 67
rendering it a proposed84. Uh there's an existing curb cut. There's two current off- streetet parking spaces. The proposal is to add a third space uh with two of them being in tandem to provide one space per unit. Uh
the owner who's on the call has an additional child that's going to reside in the third floor. Sorry, twins. They're going to reside in the third floor. So the entire uh proposed three family structure will be owner occupied. Uh we did present to the SMACA on the
31st of March and we do have a vote of support that's been provided to Stephanie Haynes for your review. So I think uh any existing nonconformity is pre-existing. So by going vertically we do have a further exacerbation of a
non uh pre-existing sideyard setback. Um but otherwise I think it's relatively self-explanatory. Uh, and happy to defer and turn it over to the board for questions and or commentary by the architect or owner. >> Thank you. Are there any 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 55 to 57 St. Marks Road. Our office defers to the board's judgment. A community process was conducted including an abutters meeting
held on 1126 that was well attended by several Dorchester community members. The feedback from this meeting was concerns of density where the community members mentioned that ongoing parking issues at this proposal uh they are worried will increase if um and if the
uh condo unit will still be owner occupied in the years to come instead of turning into a rental. The proposal was also reviewed by the St. Marks Area Civic Association at their meeting on 33126. The association expressed support. 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 Chair, members of the board, Liam Remis from councelor Fitzerald's office. I also like go on record support this proposal. Thank you, >> Madam Chair. We don't have additional comments.
>> Okay. Would the applicant like to respond to that feedback? Yes, just briefly uh at the Abutter meeting, the original proposal was for two off- streetet parking spaces or the pre-existing uh number of spaces in response to the question about additional parking. That was where the
third additional parking space was entered and that updated site plan was kicked back to ISD which ultimately removed our violation for nonconformity for parking. So we did work to try to address the concerns of the community from the initial butters meeting and then the updated number of parking
spaces presented to the SMACA on the 31st of March for which we do have the SMACA's approval. So we think that we have tried to accommodate and uh work with the community on the original current number of parking spaces to add a third.
>> Thank you. >> Any further questions from the board? May I have a motion? Motion of approval. Second. >> Thank you. Mr. Stebridge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia. >> Yes.
>> Miss Turner. >> Yes. >> Miss Pavazzo. >> Yes. >> Miss Ponado. >> Yes. >> Mr. Collins. >> Yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries the vote. >> Thank you kindly. Next we have case BOA
179 7245 with the address of 2038 Dorchester Avenue. Um I believe one of our members will be recusing himself. >> Yes, I need to recuse myself from this
case. Thanks. Uh >> thank you. So we we will be a six member board. Uh if the applicant and or their representative are present, would they please explain the case to the court?
>> Good morning, Madame Chair. Good morning, members of the board. My name is Erns Gerier with an office address of 299 Gallivan Boulevard. Amazingly, it's just right down the street from this uh property. I have the pleasure of
representing the owner of the property sitting to my left uh Marie Gurier who also happens to be my wife. Um so I have to do a good job this morning madam chair. Um I present to you and the board for the approval 2038 which is a transit
oriented uh project. As you can see it's located right in the Dorchester corridor only a few blocks away from Ashmont station directly in front in front of the building is 10 bus lines. The proposal is for a fourstory
uh building with ground floor retail space. I should um submit to you that the project we started way back in 2025 and originally was for 24 unit building. We engaged the community by my office
sending out letters to abutters as well as uh members throughout the community. We heard from them and thank you for all who may be online today. After hearing back from them, we scale it back to 18. We also engage all of the stakeholders
including our elected officials and then we scale it back against to 12. Um during the process I should point to you there was a fire in the back of the building that damaged part of the building and then as a result the
building now sits vacant. And um and while the the the fire took place, I should report to you, no one um was uh badly injured even though the tenants were displaced. We had the opportunity to engage with BPDA who assisted in the
design and and made some recommendations. So what we have for your approval is this um project and we seeking relief from nine variances uh predominantly um article 65 which is
multif family forbidden. This is an existing two family. So it was already um forbidden. And I should let you know that historically this building has been a mixed use where the previous owner used the first floor for his law office
and the second floor residential. Uh general forbidden uh use for retail space. in in keeping with the characteristic and what we heard from BPD is that um most of the newly designed um project and doorships to
have a first floor retail. We have not made the determination um what we will ultimately do with the first floor. Our intention probably is move our law office there and keep the um rest of the building residential off streetet
loading. There is in fact um a driveway an existing parking lot. So again depending on what goes in the first floor we would u u modify that an off streetet parking. Um I would submit to you generally and my office again is
right down the street is not an issue um for drive and they have plenty of off streetet parking. Uh uh as I pointed out earlier it's right down the street from from Ashmont and the bus line. um the
flaw and um the height. Uh what we've heard throughout the process uh from most of the the community members in uh Butters is that they wanted an all access building that would accommodate everyone including those who may be
physically challenged and as a result Marie decided to uh u um put an elevator in the building and um that's the height restriction. Uh my architect is also online uh Fred
Moneygot who will walk you through the design process. And I should just say to you uh for your review, I'm happy to support more than 42 letters of support. Um uh most of them directly from uh neighbors to the left, neighbors to the
right. um as well as um our elected officials, we were able to to get letters of support from uh Madame uh uh council boots uh Julia Mahia uh Minion C Pepper and
we've worked with the office of Brian um uh who may or may not be online. So at this point I'll turn it over to Fred Money to walk you through the design and if you have any questions I happy to to address them. Thank >> Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair, members of the
board. I'll keep it very brief. I think uh uh Mr. Gay alluded to a lot of the points that I was planning on making. The basic fact of the building is there presenting 12 units uh six onebedroom, one bath and two one two bedrooms, two
baths. It's a transit oriented design. So, we located on what we feel is a is a very uh accessible uh address in terms of uh public transportation. 3 minutes from Ashford station, 12 bus stops right in front of the building. Uh we're
proposing a four-story building that that is in keeping with a lot of the uh structures already on Dutch A and a lot smaller than a lot of the new construction that have been uh put up in the last couple years. So, uh, it's it's a basically a building that we think is
going to be in keeping in scale and style with west in the neighborhood, keeping the vernacular intact, uh, and and and keeping the units to a point where they're small enough that they they they actually fit the transit orientated model in terms of one and two
bedrooms. We are providing three parking spaces that have have not been dedicated to anyone in particular that can be decided at a later time. Maybe they'll support the the the the retail office space that could be in the ground floor or maybe they can be assigned to to maybe uh three tenants
that may have some special needs. So, and uh having said that, I I'm open to any questions you may have on the design. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. How much um green space is there? I I guess I'm I'm not seeing bushes or trees on the site. >> Uh
uh I don't know if you can bring the site plan. Uh uh one of the things that we uh comments that we received from the uh neighbor neighbors and and and the many uh u community meetings we've had was was an issue regarding uh uh lack of
green space. And one of the things we are committed to doing is uh assuming that we probably will need to have some sort of review with BPDA is is to actually uh bring these uh uh issues to front and and address them. We feel like
it's is very easily tackled by by by by providing some um some green space in the front of the building and also towards the back. We will have a driver that will be a permeable space and then there'll be maybe there'll be some opportunities there to have some green line bushes on alongside the properties.
So there's some work to be done in that in that sense but we we do intend to to make some progress towards that goal. >> Thank you. Other questions from the board? uh can you address whether this is rental or home ownership and and how you comply with um the inclusionary
development policy? >> Well, I don't know if Ern wants to answer that. I know we are obligated to meet the uh the the ordinance in in terms of affordable uh set aside. So, that will be that will be done and I do believe that is is intending to go above
and beyond that. >> Yes. Yes. Thank you. Uh thank you for the questions and uh again um during my brief um presentation. I I mentioned the extensive uh community engagement. Originally when we started, we intended
to to make those all rental. And when we engaged uh civic leaders, uh there was a very strong desire to just for home ownership and they educated us on the need for that. And what we would like to do with permission of the board is to
make them condos, but reserve two of them simply because we have two kids uh who no longer want to live with us and have a desire to move back into their city. um with with with approval from the board, we'd like to keep at least two of the units for ourselves so that
we can um uh pass them on to our children, but the remaining would be condos to promote home ownership in the community. >> Uh I think as long as it does not uh interfere with the IDP requirements, like you're not taking those two off of
the 12. Um, >> no. >> Well, how many units are affordable is the really the question of this project. >> Two. >> Yes. >> Two units. Okay. >> Yes. Yes. >> Two. Okay. Thank you.
>> Okay. 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 2038 Dorchester AB. Our office defers to the board's judgment. A community process was conducted including an abutters meeting held on 12125 that was well attended by
several Borchester community members where the feedback from this meeting was overall productive although there were some concerns expressing uh density and parking. Additionally we received uh letters of excuse me letters of support from councelor minor co pepper councelor
Julia Mahia and councelor Ruthie Luen. We also received 20 letters expressing support and two letters expressing opposition to the project. The proposal was also reviewed by the lower mill civic association and the applicant had had some difficulties in conversation where the civic association had
significant concerns including density, parking setbacks as well as height and requested the applicant make major changes and return to meet with them at a later date. The applicant wished to move forward with their 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. >> Madame chair, we don't have additional hands raised at the moment. Thank you. Um, can you comment again on the the ground floor uses? >> Go ahead.
>> Yes. So, the uh ground floor, my office again is at 299 Gallivan Boulevard and in terms of just give you geographic location. It's just one and a half blocks away. Um our intention is to move
the office to the ground floor and that was again um born out of the community concern. Um they just didn't want a lot of um people coming in and lack of parking and the way we operate. We are able to schedule those who visit our
office um uh and and we do a lot of Zoom meeting and we think that would be uh represent the least amount of disruptive to our neighbors and the community. Okay, Mr. Hampton, are you on? Just to Can you clarify the the use piece, the
general retail versus a a law office? >> Uh, yes. Thank you, Madam Chair, members of the board. Uh, Jeff Hampton, City of Boston Planning Department. Um, general retail is a completely different use than a professional office. Um, so I think if uh the opponent were to put his
law office on the ground floor of this building, uh, they'd need a change of occupancy because like I said, general retail is a very different use uh, than a professional office. So that I just want that as a point of clarity
and just an FYI for the appellant. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Um, is someone named Thomas? Are you looking to speak? >> Uh, I am, Madam Chair. >> Okay. Briefly. Yes, please. Um, my name
is Thomas Maestro. My address is 1049 Adam Street in Dorchester. I'm representing the Lower Mills Civic Association of which I have been a board member for approximately 30 years. I am a 39y year resident of Lower Mills. I'm a registered architect and I've spent 14
years and also spent 14 years working as a design review architect with the BRA where I had the opportunity to prepare and present projects like this for the board's consideration. I am here today to voice the Lower Mill Civic Association's strong objection to the
proposed variances. The opposition to is based on excessive release being sought. Um the comments that we um moving forward on what those points would be, the proposed plan places 12 units on a
site where three I repeat three are allowed. Um there there's not another there are very there's one with the exception of one property there's not another multif family building with in the 70 uh foot radius of the building um
with the exception of the Boston home which is across across the street and that's on a 5 acre lot. The proponent plans for a four-story structure in a neighborhood of approximately two and a half story structures, single uh single and uh two family structures. And uh but
although there are a few three family dwellings to the south between this property and um Morton Street, Galvin Boulevard. Um uh the proponent plan uh plans commercial use on the ground floor, a
forbidden use in the 3F subdist. As the board is aware, these commercial uses have been a problem to rent even in the popular community commercial subdist. So parking without uh stand a good chance
of uh without parking this space uh stands very good chance of not being able to be leasable. Uh the proponent plans only three parking spaces for 12 units um uh or a a 2 point about 0.25 parking ratio. Uh it's not clear how the
spaces will even be accessed by their plan as insufficient space is being provided for maneuvering. Even the TOD2 development they right at Ashmont Station has a 2:1 parking ratio. of this ratio. Um we we don't even believe that the project could be financable with so
few parking spaces. The proponent proposes no front yard setback although they had come to us indicating that they would. >> Can you please wrap up your points? >> Can you please wrap up your points? So no front yard. >> Uh the project has no usable open space.
The FR is almost double the allowable F. Um the underlying F3D residential subd district is established to maintain the character of the area which is >> Thank you. >> Okay. Can the applicant uh briefly
respond? >> Yeah. Uh go ahead. >> Yes. Uh um Madam Chair, um I think there were a few points that were made that I maybe I can address very quickly. In terms of the scale of the building, I think if you stand in front of a a
proposed building, I think within viewing distance, you will notice uh a few addresses. Dutch is 910 Duchess of AB, 1943 Duchess AB, 1975 Duchess of AB, 2045 D A. That's just four of them that I can think of right now that are much
larger scale than what we're proposing. Uh uh and if anybody was familiar with Dutch a uh uh a a this corridor does have uh uh several uh four to five story buildings uh and and what we're
proposing is not uh a a foreign to what's been uh in in the neighborhood for a while also what's been presented in and built in the last few years. As far as a setback um uh there there is there is a little bit of setback being
presented right now uh at the site uh where there there will be opportunity to to plant some bushes and some greenery but we are open to pushing the building back a little bit uh uh to to create even more of that if if if if desired.
uh regarding the parking uh I think we were very frank at the onset of this presentation that this is a transit oriented design uh we don't we with a with a project that is within uh walking distance to Ashman station with 12 bus lines right in front of our building so
we feel that the parking issue while we understand how important it is to the community we feel like because of the nature of this building we we we mitigate that quite a bit thank you very much You you unmute, Madam Chair. Sorry. >> Sorry. Okay.
>> Any other questions from the board? >> Yeah, I I just um in regards to the BPD recommendations of um providing some front yard setback >> uh that would ensure kind of elimination
of the three parking spaces in the rear. I do see pro problems with the maneuverability of getting in and out with the with the one of the parking spaces right at the end of the driveway. Um and so the question really yields,
you know, would the project still work without any without any um parking spaces if you were to really include some front yard setbacks of you know based on what BPD is recommending.
So that's a question for the applicant. Would you be >> would it be would it still work if you were to eliminate one or two spaces to accommodate yard? >> Yes, we we believe that uh the project will still stand on its own merit if we were to reduce the number of parking and
as I mentioned this uh this project is a transit oriented uh uh proposal. We're not relying on parking for the viability of the project. this we we we we expect and actually will encourage many of our inhabitants to actually take advantage
of public transportation. Um the uh the the parking spaces were were being proposed we feel like as a some sort of bonus amilaration on the site. uh and and you know, I think if we needed to push back the building uh and sacrifice one
parking space, I think to me it's a it's a it's a valuable and and and uh trade off and that I will be willing to and and and and again uh we are very flexible in terms of our uh uh arrangement with whatever you guys
propose in terms of uh um engagement with DPDA and making some changes to the building or to the site site plan. But I think when you look at the building overall this the scale the number of the the number of units the type of units are being proposed I think that's very in keeping what's being
proposed up and down the chess have and I think we think we're very excited about this project. >> Okay. Um I don't have any further further questions >> sir we're not going back and forth with public comment so now is the time for the board to speak. Thank you. Are there
any other questions from the board? May I have a motion? >> Madam chair, I'd like to put forward a motion of approval with a proviso that the project undergoes BPD design review for site planning on the overall location of the building to kind of work
with its context uh setbacks. And the other proviso is to allow for the BPD to determine um the amount of parking if any but to increase open space which I feel would be needed for 12 unit uh to
accommodate dumpsters trash. Uh that would be my motion >> and a housing agreement to be executed. >> I'm sorry. and then to also uh u a third proviso that the applicant enters into a housing agreement with Mo to provide
affordable units per the IDP regulations. >> Thank you. Uh is there a second? >> Second, >> Mr. Stumbridge. >> Yeah. >> Mr. Valencia. >> Yes.
>> Miss Turn uh sorry uh Miss Benabraza. >> Yes. Miss Ponado, >> yes. >> Mr. Collins, >> yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries above. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Madam Chair.
>> Thank you. >> Um, Madam Chair, the next two are next two cases are companion cases. Uh, I have a note that the first one will be withdrawn and the second will be
deferred. With that, we have case BOA1776829 with the address of 31 Plain Street. Um, this is the one that have not being withdrawn.
And I'm sorry along with that we have case BOA 1777 6822 with the address of 29 Street. >> And Caroline, do they already have a new deferral date?
>> Yes. So for 29 Street for June 16th at 11:30 a.m. >> Do you need two separate motions or one? Okay. So, may I have a motion? >> Motion to defer until June 16th of this
year at 11:30 a.m. >> to defer 29 Plain Street. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Stebridge? >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia? >> Yes. >> Miss Turner? >> Yes. >> Miss Barza? >> Yes.
>> Miss Bonado? >> Yes. >> Mr. Collins? >> Yes. >> Chair votes? Yes. The motion carries. >> So with that, we'll move on to the next case, which is case BOA 180 5913
with the address of 42 East Street. If the applicant and their representative are present, they could explain to the board. >> Good morning, chair, madame chair, and members of the board. My name is Bonnie Tan with JCBT Architect. Um we have came
into the board a couple years ago for the uh variance of 42 East Street and at the promise stage not realized the last plan exam missed a couple of uh
items on the refusal letter. So um the drawing layout hasn't been changed since after uh BPDA. So the added um item that was missing including additional insufficient loting
unit use regulation and main door being on the side. So these actually the doors we have been discussed at the first meeting but it wasn't on the refusal letters
and we're seeking um to see if the board can um approve this uh matter today. >> Questions from the board? >> Mr. H just to confirm that you have three units. The project is for three
units and nine parking spaces. >> The parking spaces hasn't been change and it's still three unit. Um, yes, we have uh plenty of parking spaces. >> Why do you need nine parking spaces for
three units? >> We have actually reduced the number of parking space to put more two for six parking space from the first meeting. Um the board was seeking we have a couple of um visitor parkings in the front from
the fir very first of the uh zoning hearing that the board suggest to reduce those parking and push the building forward and have more green space. So we don't have outdoor parking anymore. It's just uh six garage parking. There's no outdoor parking.
>> Okay. just on the planning department recommendation they are they notice uh six garage spaces and three surface spaces perhaps spaces anymore >> yeah there's no more outdoor parking spaces
>> okay thank you Mr. Hampton >> Mr. Hampton. >> Uh, yes. Thank you, Madam Chair, members of the board, Jeff Hampton, City of Boston Planning Department. Um, as the appellant stated, they do have stamped approved plans by the BPDA for uh, six
garage parking spaces. Um we were a little confused on why this was coming back when they did have stamp plans and we were wondering why all of a sudden these three um violations were now being cited after the ZBA
had approved this back in 2023 and the appellant had received our stamped approved plans. We were curious if the design is changing and what else might be happening. So, uh, we just want to have some sort of confirmation that this
was an error by ISD and that because I don't see any new plans, they are still using the ones that were stamped by us to be presented to the inspectional services department. >> Correct. There's no changes since BPDA approval. It was um ISD error that
missing three items of the violation on the refusal letter. >> And this was brought after you had tried to bring the plans to ISD. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Any other questions from the
board? May I have public testimony? >> Madam chair, members of the board, for the record, my name is Jeremy Bambbury. Actress the community engagement specialist for the office of neighborhood services. The applicant has completed the community process which consists of subcommittee prior distributed to a voters as well as
encouraging to reach out to the civic association and with no community feedback was approved to move forward. Thank you for your time. The mayor's office delivered services like to defer to the board. >> Thank you madam chair. We don't have additional comments. >> Okay with that. May I have a motion?
>> Madam I just have a clarification. Can you go to the front the front uh the parking spaces, please? The front elevation where you see the garage. So, um I'm reading the front the front elevations.
>> Page six. >> Yep. Keep going. Okay, I see. Um so, this this garage is internal to the driveway, correct? >> Correct. Okay. So, um I'm still a little
bit um confused in regards to what we're approving. So, maybe Madam Chair, you can just clarify one more time what we're approving. >> I see Mr. Hampton's hand up. I think you can uh >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. This may be very splitting of hairs, but the design that is being shown here is different than the what is on the stamped plants. >> That was per BPDA request
>> when because we have stamped plans from 2024 that do not show these changes. >> Um, >> can can I make a I'm sorry. Can I make a motion of deferral so that um we know
uh we have just a clear picture what we're approving um because there seems >> I think that would be that would be uh helpful since the again the project description also seems slightly off right with the three spaces and then it seems like the plans are different than what BPD approves so uh we have a motion
is there a second >> okay Mr. Stebridge >> yes >> Mr. Valencia. >> Yes. >> Miss Turner, >> yes. >> Miss Ba Barazza, >> yes. >> Miss Fado, >> yes.
>> Mr. Collins, >> yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. Stephanie, do you have a date for them? >> Uh, the next date would be July 14th. >> Okay. And I can I make a recommendation that the applicant if you if you can
provide a submission of what BPD um stamped as the approved plans. >> Mhm. >> And um and submit that with then the these design and outline what what is
being changed or what we are approving. Just a little bit of context would be helpful in the explanation of the project. >> Understand? >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Uh our next case is case BOA 15430 93 with the address of 1195 to 1199 North Dorchester Avenue. And before we go any further, madam chair, I believe
we have six recuse themselves from this case. >> Yes, I need to recuse myself from this case. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. We are again a six member board. >> So with that, we will ask the applicants and all the representatives to explain
this case to the board. >> Sure. Good morning madam chair, members of the board, attorney Derek Small of a business address 51. Uh with me today is the architect for the project, Mr. Anthony Pazani. And so today we're here seeking relief
um to combine parcels uh demolish the existing structure at two Green Mount Street and erect a three-story building for offices and retail spaces um at the address on Dorchester Avenue. Uh the zoning subd district here is straddled
straddles two zoning subdist property does um which is the neighborhood shopping district and the 3FD 3000 uh subdists. We are with a combined lot size of about 12,100 square ft. We are seeking to
erect um the three-story building for officers and retail. Um with regard to zoning violations, um inspectional services department has cited us both in both zoning subdists and so we are seeking relief uh from this board for
those uh violations. Uh the F um in the neighborhood shopping district the required F is one and the 3FD is 1.3 and our proposal is at 1.6. Um with regard to um the use um the
access the accessory parking in the residential is um uh forbidden use and the use in the retail in the residential we're also seeking relief for I can stop there let uh Mr. Bazani present the plans and go through um the program um
as presented. >> Hey Sus if you can allow Mr. Bazani to >> Yes. Uh thank you. Um I I just would like to point out that these plans while the plans are accurate, the these are
older elevations and do not uh absolutely reflect the changes that we made to the project. The changes that we made to the project uh were basically elevational changes. If you could go back to the front elevation, I I'll
simply describe those. >> Let's go down one more. That's the parking plan. One more. >> One more. >> That's section. >> Want the section through or Okay, one more. >> No, >> this is trying to
Okay. So this this was the first scheme uh and the first scheme shows and the major change was that this scheme shows Bristol uh across the front elevation. The
neighbors thought that that was a little bit aggressive and uh what we did was we subsequently eliminated the brieet and we used a larger cornis line that is a curved
corner line. um the project other than that the plans. If we go to the plans now, >> scroll down. >> Okay. So, we we can describe the project well from here. Um the project is on
Dorchester Avenue and Greenmont Street, the corner of backs uh and is surrounded by the dot block. Uh the project
consists of retail on the ground floor and smallcale office space on the second and third floor. One of the needs that has been developed over time in this neighborhood is there are very little
there is very little space for smalltime commercial. Uh and the community and the owner have discovered that there's a need for smalltime office space
um for everything from accountants to perhaps dentists to uh uh Yeah. And so we we've worked extensively
with the community with regard to um the retail space and the office space. The current um occupant of the building is a nail bay um salon and and businesses that will be moving into the building as well. And um we've heard extensively
from the community that um they would like to see a bank or and or a credit union on the retail um ground level um you know going for the retail space and so that's what um we are seeking to seeking to do. If you um scroll down a
little bit further mad Mr. Deep you can stop right there. Um this shows the parking plan. Um the parking will be um off of Greenmouth Street. Uh we are proposing 12 parking spaces in the rear of the building. Um
and the traffic flows from Pleasant Street in Dorchester down to Dorchester Avenue. There is an existing curb cut on um Green Mount Street and then folks would turn right onto um the street and
then take a right onto Dorchester Avenue. So, the traffic blows um pretty steadily. Um we work with the community again extensively. Um we sought a curb cut off of Dorchester Avenue, but um the transportation department um um did not
agree with that as there is a very large curb cut um which supports the dot block building on Dorchester Avenue within that block. Um, so, um, the parking again will be off of Green Mount Street,
12 spaces. Um, and we will be using the existing curb cut on that site. Uh, we can stop there and take any questions that folks may have. >> Thank you. Uh, 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 1195 to 1199 Dorchester app. Our dark our office defers to the board's judgment. A community process has been con ongoing and a meeting was hosted more than two
years ago. Considering the time passed, we requested another meeting that was hosted on 31826 that was well attended by several Dorchester community members and mostly residents from Green Mountain Street uh the street that this proposal intersects. The feedback from this was
residents had significant concerns in regards to parking as they were unsure how cold spaces would accommodate both ground floor retail and office spaces above. They also expressed that their street received significant congestion during rush hour and were worried that this proposal would only exacerbate that
issue. The proposal was also reviewed by the Columbia 7ill Civic Association where they requested changes for the proposal to include a drop off area and additional curb cut for the traffic to flow better. The association planning and zoning committee recommended support for the general membership vote. At this
time, the mayor's office neighborhood services defers to the board's judgment on this matter. Thank you everyone for your time and consideration. >> Thank you. >> Hello madam chair, members of board may councelor Pitzerald's office go in record support of this proposal, but we've also received a bunch of uh
comments from constituents about the parking entrance and exit off Greenmont Street. just looking forward to hope they continue to work with residents just kind of address and alleviate the concerns. >> Madam Chair, we don't have additional comments. >> Can I just add, Madam Chair, that um
prior to the sponsored Butters meetings, we have been working with and we will continue to work with the residents on Green Mount Street. Um we've had several meetings um with them and we will continue um to do that as as the project move forward if if if approved. Also, we
are amendable to um the recommendations of the BPD with regard to this project uh um as we move forward. Thank you. >> Okay. Any other questions from the board?
May I have a motion? Madam Chair, I'd like to put forward a motion of approval that the project undergoes BPD design review to pay special attention to the screening that's required along the parking area.
Um and uh and also just for site planning for you. >> Okay. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Just Mr. Beverage. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia.
>> Yes. >> Miss Barza. >> Yes. >> Miss Ponado. >> Yes. >> Mr. Collins. >> Yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. >> Thank you very much, Madam Chair,
members of the board. Have a good day. >> Next. Next we have case BOA 1824677 with the address of 16 Nightingale Street. If the applicant and or their representative are present, they please
explain the case to the board. >> Uh, sure. Uh my name is Alexov. I'm the owner of the property and Mitri is um my uh general contractor and partner on this. Um this case was actually approved in 2023 already. Uh and then it was
retroactively refused because of ISD errors similar as to the previous um not previous but the case site before that was mentioned and we went through the same thing. Uh they left out one of the variances. Um we back in 2023 we went
through the utters meeting we uh talked to the uh we obtain letter of support. Uh everyone was on board with this project. Uh this is about one block away from Talbot station. So it is a transit oriented development as well. We're not adding any um like we're not changing
the building envelope aside from adding the balcony in the back. And uh the fourth floor was already pre-existing prior to the fire damage. It was used as attic space. We just asked to convert that to a habitable unit, a fourth unit. Um
this you're looking at the new proposal. U again nothing has changed since 2023. This is identical to what was presented in 2023 and was already approved. Uh the difference and M can speak uh speak more on this was in that one of the variances was missed at that time which did not
surface until we uh were going ahead through actual rebuilt uh um later on. >> Sir, what was the violation that was missed? >> Uh it was sparking radius. Uh Demetri, do you want to speak more on that? >> Yeah, I'm so sorry. I'm having trouble
by video, so I apologize for I'm trying to get that in order, but I believe it was instead of 5 ft, it was down to uh they referenced it as 3 ft. Um and that was the only difference was the 2 ft difference, but um the inspector when we applied for the building permit still
requested us to come back, but it was approved by the ZVA. >> Thank you. Are there other 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 Joe community
engagement specialist for the office of neighborhood services. The applicant has completed the community process which consisted of a notification flyer distributed to a voters. To date, our office has received one letter of concern regarding property in the area during construction. So that
has been sent to the board for review. Thank you for your time. members of services would like to defer to the board for their >> Thank you, >> Madam Chair. We don't have additional hands raised at the moment. >> Okay. May I have a motion?
>> Madam Chair, I'd like to put for a motion of approval. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Stbridge? >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia? >> Yes. >> Miss Turner? Yes,
>> Miss Better Brazo. >> Yes, >> Miss Panado. >> Yes, >> Mr. Collins. >> Yes, >> Cher. The motion carries. Good luck. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Next, we have case B836018 with the address of 18 Drummond Street. If the applicants andor their representative are present, the police respond to the board. >> Yes, Mr. Stebridge. Good morning, Madam Chair, members of the board. Attorney
Derek Small of an address on 51 Doppson Road. Um, I'm here today uh seeking relief to erect a three family dwelling on a vacant lot. Um, a zoning subdist here is a 3F5000. So, it is a three family uh zoning subdist. Um our
violations are um F the required F is 0.8 8. Uh we are proposing 1.9. Um sideyard violation requirement is 5 ft. We have five on one side and three on the other. Uh rear yard setback, the
requirement is 30 ft. Uh we are proposing three. Uh with regard to parking, the required parking is three spaces and we are providing none no off streetet parking. So, um, the violations
are the dimensional violations, um, in this zoning subdist, which are are very common on all of the lots. If we can go back up to the site plan, that would be great. Um, as this section of Droy Street um, is a dead-end street.
that dead end. Um, if you want to go back to the site plan, um, that dead end street, that section of Jerome Street, there are a number of vacant parcels, all of which are are are kind of small in nature, but historically, this section of Droy
Street has been um the site of a lot of illegal dumping, um, a lot of nefarious activity. And so what we're trying to do as well is trying to create housing on vacant lots, keeping in um consistent with the mayor's plan for um creating
housing um on on the vacant lots in the city of Austin, as well as um getting riding the blight of these vacant lots in this section. Again, um we are seeking to create uh three family dwelling in a three uh family subdist um
at at Droy Street. again. So, um we met with the fire department. The fire department has cleared the way for access um on that section of the dead end street. We've had uh several meetings with butterers and neighbors who are
welcome some some activity down on that section of Droy Street. Um and so, uh we are seeking your approval for this today. I can stop there and answer any questions that folks may have. 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 Beverly. I am the community engagement specialist. I'm the Dorchester community engagement specialist for the Office of Liquid Services. The applicant has completed the community process which consisted of a voters's meeting
facilitated on January 7th uh which one voter attended in support of the proposal expressing favor for additional housing in the development of the currently vacant lot. The proposal was then presented to Dudley Square Neighborhood Association Dudley
Square Neighborhood Initiative uh on February 26. Concerns raised included the lack of proposed parking and sufficient setbacks and the potential impact of market rate development on local property taxes which may create financial burdens for
fixed income families. Additionally, Dudley Street Neighborhood Initiative expressed the opposition to the proposal due to the absence of affordable housing units. To date, our office has not seen any further during the pandemic. Thank you for your time in this office services.
Thank you. Madame Chair, there are no additional comments. >> Madam Chair, just if if I may, um these are two-bedroom, one bath uh units. Um they will be um home ownership
opportunities. Um and again, I think um there was some concern with the meeting at DSNI that there were no affordable units, quote unquote affordable, with regard to the IDP. and I, you know, and I expressed to him that it was a required um on a project of this size.
So, with that um I'll turn it back over to you. >> Thank you. Any other questions from the board? May I have a motion? >> I put forward a motion of approval.
Is there a second? >> Mr. Stebridge. >> Yeah. >> Mr. Mr. Valencia, >> yes. >> Miss Turner, >> yes. >> Miss Better Brazo, >> yes. >> Miss Panado, >> yes.
>> Mr. Collins or Yes. >> Chair votes? Yes. The motion carries. Good luck. >> Thank you very much, Madam Chair, members of the board. Have a good day. Next we have case BOA 1824914
with the address of 73 Sachin Street. The applicants and or their representative are present to the board. >> Good morning. Yes, David Hman here. >> Please proceed.
>> Thank you. Um, my name is David Hman. I'm a Mission Hill resident. I live at 13 Worthington Street and I'm presenting this uh this is a two family uh property. Um, and I'm uh proposing the addition of four units utilizing the
adjacent lot um which was previously purchased from the city of Boston through the RFP process. Um part of this process was um in a commitment to maintain the historic wall at the front of the property and a large oak tree. Uh
through careful design with my architect my architectural team Heresco Associates were able to design a property where we could develop units that are uh feasible and find to be a good fit for the neighborhood. Uh the total unit count will be six. Um we are within the the
height requirement of this addition. Uh we will have four we are proposing to have four two-bedroom units and then three I'm sorry two uh duplex three bed units. Um, our are areas of relief needed are insufficient parking, uh, use
forbidden, excessive F, insufficient additional lot area per unit, insufficient front yard setback, and insufficient rear yard setback of the shallow lot. Um, with that, I will turn it over to the board for comment and questions.
>> Thank you. Are there questions from the board? >> Hearing none, we have public testimony. Madame Chair and board members, Sigi Johnston with the Office of Neighborhood Services. This petitioner completed the community process. Our office hosted an abutters meeting on February 4th at
which no opposition was raised. The Community Alliance of Mission is supporting this application. With that background, ONS defers judgment to the board. Thank you. >> Thank you, Madame Chair. Next, we have Elizabeth Benham. >> Hi, my name is Elizabeth Benham. I live
at 1L Doris Street in Mission Hill. I was unaware of the meeting. Um, we have trouble getting mail here because of never mind. It's the post office. We don't get our mail. At anyway, I am concerned because this is not housing for people who are not students and we
are surrounded by students and we are also live in a place that is gets we can hear Fenway's um concerts from here. So my concern is I have to walk around and find out so I can ask the kids to please go inside or turn down the music. We're
up at three and four in the It's just density for me. It's density. And we have another place that's just being built now that they're going to have like 12 kids in there. 12 more kids. So this isn't for affordable housing or for people who live in the city that want to have a community. I don't we don't have
a neighborhood anymore on the street. It's just taken over by rentals. and the rentals. They make a lot of money because they get four or five kids in one apartment and they at working people cannot afford the rents
in contrast to the students. And so this to me is is like this isn't helping with housing other than for students. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Next we have the person with the a
iPhone. Madam chair, members of the board, my name is Adam Sarbach. Um Mission Hill resident community alliance board member. Um speaking in support of it, as um the ons referenced, Dave Hman did come multiple times to the community
alliance. um took feedback from the um engagement and the meetings and actually changed his design accordingly, eliminating some outdoor space and some patios from other neighbors concerns um a budding neighbor concerns of that. Um
he did Mission Hill is a tough neighborhood for development and uh Dave Hast went through with uh flying colors in the vote on approval and support in the community alliance which is which is an a uh rare feat. So I just wanted to
point that out both as a Mission Hill resident and as a um board member of community alliance to support the project. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next we have Tony Bias. >> Morning Madam Chair, members of the
board. Um any bias behalf of >> would just like to go on record. >> I'm sorry you're going in and out. >> Um councelor Durkin would like to be um record in support of this. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you madam chair. There are no additional comments. Okay. Are there other questions from the board? Can the applicant touch on the concerns that were raised? >> Sure. Um I appreciate Adam's uh comments
and to reiterate that. So based on after initial meeting which was March 18th, uh we went back to the drawing board and we removed a single outdoor space for the unit. Um, and that was in recognition of uh any potential noise from the single
uh outdoor space to our abuing neighbors. Um, I've met with resident the butterers um directly on site there um and uh I'm happy to address um the the comments
from from today's meeting, but I feel like removing the outdoor space was appropriate. Um and also mentioning that um five of the nine units that I do have are rented to professionals. So I'm not I'm not targeting students on this. Uh I am a by trade a property manager and so
I have a good track record of maintaining units as well as maintaining our our residents uh within the community. >> Thank you. Any any questions from the board? >> May I have a motion?
>> Motion to approve. Is there a second? >> Second, >> Mr. Stebridge. >> And you on mute, Mr. Stumbridge? >> Sorry about that, Madam Chair. >> Yes. >> Thank you, Mr. Valencia. >> Yes.
>> Miss Turner. >> Yes. >> Miss Benabaza. >> Yes. >> Miss Panado. >> Yes. >> Mr. Collins. >> Yes. Chair votes yes. The motion carries. Good luck. >> Thank you.
>> Chair, at this moment, uh, since we pass the 11:00 hour, we will I'll ask if there are any requests for withdrawals or deferrals from the 11 a.m. here. Hearing none, we'll return to the 9:30
hearings to case BOA 182 7268 with the address of 49 Vine Street. If the applicant and Oregon representative present, they please explain the case
report. >> Good morning everyone. Um, my name is James Tenniso. representing 49 Vine Street in Charleston. And what we're looking to do is uh build a carport where the existing parking spots are uh
for the aging priests that are living um in that building. There's been existing parking there and we're just looking to add coverage um due to for weather. Uh we had a priest fall last year and we've been using temporary uh tents almost um
to cover the lot and we're just looking to put a more permanent structure there. >> Next questions from the board. >> Can you explain um uh in terms of the parking what what is
there now? Is it just open space? >> Yeah, it's just an open lot that can fit I believe it's four uh full-size cars and two compact cars, >> right? But um that's what you're proposing. So exist >> those spots exist currently.
>> Those spots do currently exist. >> Correct. >> So the carport spots exist. You're not adding more parking. >> Correct. No, I'm just looking to add the coverage over the top of it. existing parking spots. >> Correct. Yes. >> Okay. And um and what is the reason
again to do that? >> Um there's just age increases that are living there and um it's been just a struggle in the winter uh for them. Um and we've used temporary structures um
and like tent like structures and the this came up uh someone suggested it. So he said, "Let's look and see what it takes to to do that." >> Right. So it's for it's for an aging population, you said. >> Yeah. The >> recover.
>> Yes. >> Okay. Um I don't have any further questions. I'm just I would like to um I'm trying to find out uh why the Boston planning department is their
recommendation is denial and I'm trying to understand the reasoning behind that. But um if Mr. Hampton would like to weigh in, that's fine. I'm wondering >> I mean we have a sum we have the summary here. So >> I'm wondering is it clear that these
were the same spots that exist? >> Uh are there other questions? >> I don't have any further questions. Thank you. >> And public testimony. >> Madame chair and board members. Sigy Johnson with the office of neighborhood services. This petitioner completed the community process. Our office hosted an
Abutters meeting on April 1st when Abutter supported the application citing the good community uh based organization and the positive work they do in the Charlestown community. Office also received two letters of support with similar sentiments for building a carport over the existing parking. We're
not aware of any concerns from the community. With that background, ONS defers judgment to the board. Thank you, >> Madame Chair. Next we have Stean Marine from City Council of Kleta. >> Hi madam chair, members of the board um
here on behalf of councelor Kleta Zabata and uh our office would like to go on record in support of the requested zoning relief for Harvest on Vines proporous carport at 49 Vine Street. Uh this improvement will strengthen food distribution operations and support an
organization that provides essential services to residents across Charles Town and we respectfully urge uh favorable consideration. Thank you so much. >> Thank you, >> Madam Chair. There are no additional comments. >> Any other questions from the board?
>> Um can you just go ahead? >> Yeah, I would address the issue of screening. Is there any plan to do any landscaping on this site? >> In front of where the cars are, there are existing trees and uh and bushes
there. Um but it's right now it's all asphalt. Um so I don't I don't there's nothing planned currently to add. Um and there's a little island behind that also has some
greenery in it. Yeah. Would you be open to um removing one of the compact space to allow for some green kind of vegetation screening along Tough Street because, you know,
reading the BPD recommendation, it's they're proposing denial because it's impacting the major kind of pedestrian street experience. And so, um, you know, would you be willing to rem reduce one
of the spaces to allow for vegetation? >> We we can look at that. Um, I'm not opposed to any of that. Um, uh, we can definitely we can definitely look at that. Um, and all along Tough Street there up to where the parking lot
is too, there's there's green space and trees and bushes. And right now when you walk up there it just it's alpha >> right >> I have question too just to add uh from
some from some some of the comments people are mentioning that this co is going to support the food distribution program. You mentioned that this is to help uh all their residents who use those uh parking spaces. So which one of
those two are the main reason for this um proposal? >> There are two food distributions a month that are happening in the parking lot right now. The residents live there 365 days a year. Um so it it it would do
both. Um the there are yeah there are 25 food distributions a year that are right now since CO happening in the parking lot. Um, so they're both they both would happen.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Any further questions? >> Is there a motion? Madam Chair, I I'd like to put forward a a motion of approval with a proviso that the
applicant works with BPD on the size of the port to allow sufficient vegetation to um reduce the the impact on uh on the public way. >> Is there a second?
>> Second, >> Mr. Stanbridge. Yes, >> Mr. Valencia. >> Yes, >> Miss Turner. >> Yes, >> Miss Barazza. >> Yes,
>> Miss Pado. >> Yes, >> Mr. Collins. >> Yes. >> Chair votes yes. Motion carries. >> Thank you. Next we have case BO870 4112
with the address of 19 to 21 Mil Street if the applicants andor their representative present. Will you please explain the case to the board? >> Good morning madam chair and members of the board. Uh I'm Steve Bartlett of
Foley LLP council for the applicant in this appeal curleaf Massachusetts Inc. This appeal requests board approval to change the name of the petitioner on an existing conditional use permit for the cannabis dispensary located at 19 to 21
Milk Street in downtown Boston. The the name of the petitioner on the existing permit is John Morardi and the only change to the permit for which my client is seeking approval from the board today is to replace that name with Curleaf Massachusetts Inc. Uh, the board should
be aware that my client has completed the Boston Cannabis Board licensing process. On March 25th of 2026, the BCB voted to approve a cannabis license for Cure Leaf at this location. Then on May 11th, 2026, Curleaf and the
city of Boston executed a host community agreement authorizing Curelief to operate a colllocated medical and adult use cannabis dispensary at this location. So, in other words, the BCB and the city of Boston have already vetted and approved Cure Relief
Massachusetts, Inc. as an operator of a cannabis dispensary at this location. And therefore, we respectfully request that the board grant this very narrow relief requested in this appeal, which is again simply changing the name of the petitioner on the existing conditional
use permit from John Morardi to Cure Relief Massachusetts, Inc. Um, that is the long and short of this appeal and I'd be happy to answer any questions that the board might have. Be before I do that, I would like to briefly address what I believe may have been a clerical
miscommunication related to a revised refusal letter that ISD issued on April 22nd. After the BCB provided ISD with confirmation of its vote to approve a cannabis license for Curleaf, ISD issued
a revised refusal letter noting that this location 19 to 21 Milk Street was within the buffer zone of another cannabis establishment. But to be absolutely clear and for the reasons that we set forth in the supplemental letter that was filed last week, uh this
appeal does not raise any buffer zone issues. And that is because there is an active conditional use permit for a cannabis establishment at this site which has been operated as a cannabis establishment for almost a decade. Uh the board might be aware that this
location is actually the site of the very first cannabis location in downtown Boston. In April of I'm sorry, excuse me, in August of 2016, uh, Patriot Care, now known as the cannabis, opens it opened its doors and began dispensing medical cannabis products to registered
patients. Then in 2021, the conditional use permit for the site was amended to allow for both medical and adult use cannabis sales. Uh, it is this conditional use permit that remains valid and this location has already been cited and approved by the board as a cannabis dispensary. Uh, so as a matter
of law, there is no buffer zone issue that the board needs to address here today. Um, it might be helpful for the board to know that I've discussed this very point with Ed Coburn and Caroline Burkard in the ISD general counsel's office and I I won't presume to speak for them today, but I have my
understanding is that they see this issue in the very same way um and have concluded that this appeal does not give rise to any buffer zone issues. Um, so for that reason, if the board believes it would be appropriate to make an express determination that no buffer zone issue exists here and that no
variance is required for this very narrow relief that has been requested, uh, my client and I would certainly support that resolution as a way of clarifying the record. Um, thank you for your time and I'm happy to answer any questions. >> Thank you. Are there questions from the board?
May I have public testimony? Yes, madam chair, members of the board, Bon Newman with the mayor's office of neighborhood services. This time the mayor's office deferred to the judgement of this board. Some background information the community process on and had hosted a community meeting on April 3rd of 2025. It was likely attended. Uh
in that meeting, the applicant was able to answer questions that the downtown business association's representative had uh for the establishment. They went on to uh present to the Boston Cannabis Board where they were approved. Uh there was concerns from the Warf District Neighborhood Council that had
wanted to engage more with the applicant. Um as well as concerns from a another uh dispensary operating in the downtown area. Uh but as you heard um the uh Boston Cannabis Board did approve this proposal uh and worked out a host community agreement with them. With that
information uh with no further concerns that we're aware of, we'll defer to the board. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Madame Chair. We don't have additional hands raised for comments. Okay, that may I have a motion? Mad
>> chair motion approval. >> There a second. >> Sec. >> Mr. Stanbridge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Valencia. >> Yes. >> Miss Turner. >> Yes.
>> Miss Bazzza. >> Yes. >> Miss Bonado. >> Yes. >> Mr. Collins. >> Yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. >> Thank you all. >> Next. Go through the hearing schedule
for 11:00 a.m. Uh once again, I'll briefly ask if there are any requests for withdrawals or withdrawals. Hearing none, we'll move on to case BOA 1822363 with the address of 47 Farag Road. The
applicant and or representative are present. Will they please explain to the board? >> Good morning, Madame Chair, members of the board. I'm Nick Landry from DRT. We're the architects for the project. Um, and I'm joined today by Andrea
Higgins, the the owner of the property. Um, so we're here today. Um, we've got a quite small project. We're we're just looking to finish some space in the basement to create a exercise area. Um, we sent in a presentation. I don't know
if we can pull that up. Well, while while that's getting pulled up. Um so what we've been cited for um is an F violation. We're increasing the um finished square footage in the basement by about 260 ft. Um Oh,
perfect. Okay, great. So um so the project's located at 47 Farragate Road right on the corner there. If Can we go back to the last presentation? Perfect. Um, and if you just scroll on for a second, um, to the first slide.
So, we're the project's located at 47 Far Road here. Here it's on the corner of Geese third and Farragut in South Austin. Um, we're working on on just the the scope of the work will just be on the first floor and the basement. Um, none of this work will be visible from the exterior. I go to the next slide,
please. You get on the next slide. Here we can see the so the zoning violation there's an F violation. Um what's allowable is is 2.0. Currently the building as it sits is about 2.6 and with these changes will be at about 2.72. And again that's
just going to be finishing some some space in the basement. If we can go down to the next page and zoom in on the plans on the on the left hand side there. Um and just scroll down a little bit. Um so so the so what we're looking at right here the the top the upper
leftand corner um basement you can see there's currently some finished space in the basement it's highlighted in blue we're just going to be increasing that space to make that that exercise area a little more usable and and the bathroom also a little bit more functional and that that unit currently in order for
Andrea to access that space she needs to exit the building go around the back of the building down a stair now we'll be adding a stair that will directly connect her first floor space to that basement space the eases make it a lot easier to use. Um with that that that's the scope of the project. Um and if
there's any questions happy to happy to answer. >> Thank you. Are there questions from the board? >> Hearing none. May I have public testimony? >> Yes. Sig Johnson with the office of neighborhood services. This petitioner completed the community process. Our
office hosted an abutters meeting on March 19th at which no opposition was stated. City Point Neighborhood Association took no position on this application. With that background, ONS defers judgment to the board. Thank you. >> Next, >> sorry. Next, we have Ashley from
Councelor Flynn office. >> Good morning. My name is Ashley from councelor Flynn's office. Councelor Flynn would like to go on record and support due to a good community process. You request a proponent continue to work closely with neighbors and abutters. Thank you, Madam
>> Chair. There are no additional comments. >> Okay. With that, may I have a motion? >> Sorry. >> I am sorry. Can you hear me? >> I think that Yes. >> Hi. My hand was up. You didn't call on me.
You unmuted me. So, my name is Lanna Okconor, president of the Cityoint Neighborhood Association, and I just want to go on record that the Abutters meeting did happen. There was no opposition. This particular expansion is considered a good project. It's
positive. It does not um change the look of the house andor Farragate Road, which is one of our better looking streets in South Boston. And with that, u we decided they did not need to come into City Point and could proceed straight to ZBA. So, we will take no position on
this. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> With that, may I have a motion? >> Motion to approve. >> Second, >> Mr. Miss Tumbr, >> yes. >> Mr. Valencia, >> yes.
>> Miss Turner, >> yes. >> Miss Barazza, >> yes. >> Miss Panado, >> yes. >> Mr. Collins, >> yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries the >> Thank you.
Next we have case BO8181 1 934 with the address of 16 Monument Square. If the applicants and their representative are present, would they please explain to the board?
>> Yes. Good morning, madame chairperson and board members. My name is Sarah Matusa. I am the owner of 16 Monument Square and alongside me I have my architect Elena Rosado to help answer any technical questions that you may
have. In essence, I am the owner of the top floor unit of a five unit uh dwelling on Monument Square. Collectively, we are in need of a new front half of the roof due to leakage.
I am the lucky recipient of those uh leaks and have had those for the past six or so years uh since I purchased in 2020. The roof predates me from the late8s and uh the roof deck also
predates me by a few um owners. With the demolition and redo of the roof, I would like to get a new roof deck. I was told it would be cheaper to actually do an entire rebuild than to reuse all of the
existing materials that are up there. And so I am asking for the ability to extend the uh footprint of the roof by 2 ft closer to the street. I will be in the same breath reducing the total
height of the roof deck and total height. Over on the right, you can see that. And additionally, I'm making a design change to the structure itself. Today, they are wooden slats that are about an inch and a half to 2 in wide
each up and down. And it will be a much more minimal design of a cable wiring for um less presence, so to say. Uh it's only one facing um
uh view to the street. Each of the two sides are uh concrete uh structures of my neighbors at both 15 and 17. So with that, I'd love to take any questions you may have. >> Thank you. Are there questions from the
board? >> Hearing none, we have public testimony. >> Sigy Johnson with the Office of Neighborhood Services. This petitioner completed the community process. Our office hosted an abutters meeting on April 14th at which no comments were made. That background ONS defers judgment to the board. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Madam Chair. We don't have additional comments. >> With that, may I have a motion? >> Madam Chair, I'd like to preer a motion of approval. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Stebridge? >> Yes.
>> Mr. Mr. Valencia, >> yes. >> Miss Turner, >> yes. >> Miss Barabraza, >> yes. >> Miss Panado, >> yes. >> Mr. Collins, >> yes. >> Chair votes yes. The motion carries. Good luck, ma'am.
>> Thank you. >> Okay, with that, uh, we'll take a five minute break to 11:30. >> Recording stopped. Mr. Steambridge, >> you're on mute. >> And hopefully I'm not now.
>> Thank you. Mr. Valencia, >> present. >> Miss Turner, >> present. Miss Better Brazo >> present. >> Miss Ponado >> present. >> Mr. Collins >> present. >> Thank you. Right back to you, Mr.
Stebridge. >> Madam Chair, I need to recuse from this case. >> Hasn't even been read yet, but okay. >> Okay. Um, yes. With the red discussion cases scheduled for 11:30 a.m., we begin
with case BOA182678 with the address of 70 A Street. If the applicant Oh, sorry, M. >> I was just going to say and we're a six member board. >> Yes. >> And I believe Mr. Christopher ready. I
am, Mr. Secretary. Thank you. Good morning, Madam Chair, members of the board. Uh my name is James Christopher of 686 Architects with the business address of 10 Forbes Road. I'm here behalf today on behalf of Nam Nuen uh and 70 Auckland Street. Um the proposal
before you is to construct a rear twotory addition with parking at grade. Um we need some zoning relief which include the use itself. This would be a five-unit building. It's currently a three-unit building. We'll be adding two units to the addition. Uh lot width and
frontage. The existing lot is 40 ft wide. Uh the requirement is 50. Um F the existing F is 64 and we are proposing 1.05. Um building height and front yard which
are pre-existing non-conformances. We will be matching the existing height at 36'2. Um the sideyard is uh both left and right uh are pre-existing non-conforming, but we'll be extending that pre-existing non-conformance on the
left side, but not worsening. Uh and then the rear yard is um currently 76.5 ft. Uh and it's required to be 30 and we are proposing 17.7 ft. Um as we go through the plans, the the
proposal is to it's pretty straightforward. It's a three unit building. there's no work to happen to the front building. We construct a two-story rear edition with five covered parking spaces to the rear. Uh the there was a change during the community process to the building shape and design
as we had had a flat roof. Uh and the comments came up that they would prefer a little pitched and uh so we were able to accommodate that. Um and uh five parking spaces at grade while maintaining uh a 17t rear yard open
space. So with that, I'll answer any questions I can. >> Thank you. Are there questions from the board? >> Yes. Could you please provide more information about your landscape and open space plan? There are a couple of comments about concerns that you don't
have enough green space, open space. And also, what is your plan for parking? One of your one of the is mentioning that the parking is going to negatively impact their property. So if you can just talk about those two items.
>> Sure. Currently there is uh uh two parking spaces at grade to the rear of the property. Uh under the new addition uh we will have five spaces. Uh to the rear of the property, we will have a 17 ftx 40 foot, a little bit less because
we have a turnaround area of uh open space, which um we're certainly happy to work with the BPD to to provide some planting and uh usable space uh to that area. U but the parking was accessed off of the driveway. Five spaces, one per
unit. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Other questions from the board? May I have public testimony? Hello, Madam Chair and members of the board. My name is Eva Jones representing the mayor's office of neighborhood services regarding 70 Oakland Street. Our office deferred to the board's judgment on this
matter. A community process was conducted, including an abutters meeting held on 41426 that was well attended by the Doorchester community members. The feedback from this meeting was mostly productive community conversations where some concerns were also expressed regarding the parking and the height of the building. The proposal was also
reviewed by the Columbia 7 Hills Civic Association where they opposed the proposal with concerns related to density. 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. >> Thanks. Next, we have Liam Kas from C
official. >> Hello madam chair, members of the board. uh the council like go on record in opposition this proposal due to uh some of the community concerns with the size of building intensity on the plat plan. Thank you >> madam chair we don't have additional
comments. >> Okay any additional response from the applicant? Um, now I think you know this area is definitely populated area while adding the muchneeded housing uh in close
proximity to two train stations. We are still maintaining a yard that is larger than most of our abutas. So I think that this is uh an appropriate use of this site. Thank you. >> Any other questions from the board? >> May I have a motion?
>> M. Should I make a motion of approval with approvise that the plan under goes planning department uh review special attention to increasing and improving open space? >> Is there a second? >> Second.
>> Mr. Stebridge. >> Yeah. >> Mr. Valencia. >> Yes. >> Miss Turner. >> Yes. Miss Better Brazo, >> I'm going to I'm going to say no. I think that um the project is too dense
as it is. I think you could fit five units if you were to um occupy half of that addition, rework some of the uh existing building and there and therefore then increase the open space.
Uh Miss >> Yes. chair votes yes. The motion carries. >> Thank you, >> Madam Spear. The uh note I have is that the remaining
cases have been uh withdrawn. >> I'm sorry, did you say this case is being withdrawn? >> Uh we have two remaining cases and both defendants withdrawn. >> Okay. So, thank you.
>> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Thank you. >> All right. Well, thank you everyone. >> Have a good Have a good day. >> Have a good day. >> Recording stopped.