appeal hearing for for January 23 2025 is now in session this hearing is being conducted in accordance with the applicable provisions of the open meeting law including the updated Provisions enacted by the legislature last year the new law allows the board to continue its practice of holding
virtual hearings until March 2025 this hearing of the board is being held remotely via the zoom webinar event platform the hearing is also being recorded in order to ensure this hearing of the board is open to the public members of the public May access this hearing through telephone and video
conferencing the information for connecting to this hearing is listed on today's hearing agenda which is posted on the Public Notices page of the city's website boston.gov members of the public will enter the virtual hearing as attendees which means you will not see yourself on the screen and you will be
muted throughout unless administratively unmuted when asked to comment board members applicants and their attorneys or Representatives will participate in the hearing as panelists and they will appear alongside the presentation materials when speaking panelists are strongly encouraged to keep video on
while presenting to the board as with our inperson meetings comments and support will be followed by comments and opposition the order of comments is as followed elected officials representatives of elected officials and members of the public the chair May limit the number of people
called upon to com 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 bot bottom of your screen and the zoom 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 stbridge 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 Mr stbridge good evening Madam chair president good evening Miss B Braza good
evening mam chair president good evening the floor is yours Mr St thank you madam chair we're here for the hearing scheduled for 5:00 pm we'll start off with case boa 166267 with the address of 305 to 307
Meridian Street if the applicant and or the representative present would they please explain to the board hi can you raise your hand if you're on for this proposal hello are you are you on for 305 Meridian yeah yes we
are please proceed please please state your name and address for the record yeah Jose petta um 305 307 midan Street um uh East B
02128 second H restaurant are you presenting yeah we we are okay can you tell us what you're proposing um proposing what are you seeking relief
for oh yeah we right now we need to uh let let H explain this one I don't know very well what you want to do because I had a um application for
because I DOI okan are you seeking to remove a Proviso I want yeah I want remove like they had family family something the the name before so I want put my name application there okay are there any
changes to to the to the footprint or the interior or is it just the removal of the provisor not in changing side okay any questions from the board no any questions from the board no none
oh I'm sorry go ahead no no questions okay uh may we have public testimony good evening Madam chair and members of the board my name is Eva Jones representing the mayor's office and Neighborhood Services regarding 305 Meridian Street our office will defer to the board's judgment on this matter the restaurant has made no operational
changes and we are not aware of any Community concerns at this time uh the mayor's office and Neighborhood Services defers to the board's judgment thank you for your time and consideration thank you mad CH we have no raised hands at the moment okay with that may I have a motion Madam chair I
think it's a very simple request um to remove the Parisa and therefore I'm putting forward a motion of approval there a second second Mr stbridge yes Miss B Braza yes chair votes yes the motion carries good
luck with that we'll move on to case boa 159 9811 with the address of 657 East 5th Street if the applicant Andor their representative of present would they
please explain the case to the board good evening Madam chair members of the board Tom Miller from mcder quilty Miller and Hanley 28 State Street in Boston uh I'm joined tonight by the contractor and owner Victor deore uh I believe he is in the attendees section
at the moment uh the project before you tonight will return uh this long-existing home uh on East Fifth Street uh to the two family occupancy that uh that it was originally constructed as uh this renovation will
completely update the interior of the building improving the life health and safety of the structure as well as providing much needed highquality housing in the neighborhood uh while Victor is completely updating the building he is not modifying the envelope of the structure or modifying the lot at all uh this change in
occupancy to return this second unit therefore requires relief for insufficient lot area because of this uh Additionally the project also requires relief from insufficient open space while there's some open space on the lot and Victor is adding decks to the rear of the structure uh he is not adding a
roof deck uh he knows that those um the community does not like those and he is uh continuing to be a good neighbor um here as he has been and will continue to be um because of that he's not adding the roof deck and therefore um we need
relief from uh insufficient open space uh as I'm sure you'll hear from on we held an bers meeting where they uh where this project receives support of the community um you know this this will be a benefit to the community uh and allow
appropriate use of this property so uh with that I would happily answer any questions you have thank you um just to confirm um where are you doing anything to basement is it just the existing floors that you're you know changing from one to
two um so the answer the to that question is yes um we are renovating the basement but there are no Living Spa there's no bedrooms in the basement um it is only living space in the base um and we are we are renovating um the
otherwise existing Forest we're not adding any Forest to this property thank you questions from the board hearing none I will uh ask for public testimony Madame chair and board members good evening sigy Johnson with the office of Neighborhood Services uh this petitioner has completed the on
community process our office hosted at a Butters meeting on September 16th at which one abutter was supportive and one other abutter had questions the applicant coordinated with the city Point neighborhood association which is in non opposition to The Proposal with that background we defer to the Judgment
of the board thank you Vanessa good morning Madam chair and members of the board this is Vanessa woo from councelor Flynn's office councelor Flynn would like to go on record and support based on a good Community process with neighbors and the Civic
group thank you thank you and Madam CH we have no raised hands at the moment thank you with that may I have a motion um motion motion to approve may have a second a second Mr
stbridge yes Mr better Braza yes chair votes yes the motion carries good luck thank you next we have case boa 165 4426 with the address of 139 Beach
Street if the applicant and or their representative of present will they please explain to the board good evening Madame chair and members of the board my name is Anthony Ross I'm an attorney with my office located at 343 Belgrade Avenue in
Rosendale I'm appearing uh this evening on behalf of the applicants homeowners David deare and Robin Hopkins uh this proposal involves partially renovating the existing single family dwelling uh at 139 Beach Street specifically the
plan is to remove a portion of the existing rear deck and a small single story rear projection replacing them with a two-story rear addition the addition will increase the home's size by approximately 595 Square fet allowing
for an expanded kitchen on the first floor and en large second floor bedroom and the addition of a a second bathroom on the second floor the only zoning violation uh is the proposed extension of the existing uh sidey guard non-conformity uh the property is in a 1
f6000 single family zoning District where the minimum required sidey yard is 10 ft the existing sidey yard on the side of the proposed addition uh requiring the variance is 5.1 ft the plane extends that sidewall of the building by approximately 9 1/2 ft
increasing the depth of the main body of the house from 26 feet to approximately 36 feet importantly uh the existing sidey yard non-conformity is not being increased rather it's merely being extended into the rear yard by 9 and a half ft uh the
scope of the extension is seen best um on uh if you continue down on uh plan page a11 which is a floor plan right that that one's fine um in the darkest yellow
here is the non-conformity the increase in the non-conformity uh it's being increased uh the the the area um behind the line that shows the proposed new structure the rare addition of 9 and 1 half ft uh the area in the two shades of
of orange I'll call them um the darkest is the extension of the non-conformity uh and the lighter color is the existing non-conformity uh the variance being requested is not out of character for the neighborhood many of the properties on Beach Street including the abing
homes on either side of my client's property are similarly situated um these properties are positioned off center with conforming sidey yards on the left side and a narrower non-conforming sidey yard on the right uh during the
community review process a question was raised about the potential impact on sunlight by one of the owners of the abing property to the right uh at 133 Beach Street support our representation that we made at that uh community meeting that the addition within the the
portion of the addition within the rear uh within the sidey guard setback would not significantly affect sunlight my client's architect prepared uh a shadow study illustrations that we submitted uh this variance um would allow my clients to enhance their living
space to meet their fam's needs without any Inver adverse impact on a budding Properties or the community uh and furthermore um this minimal variance um uh aligns with the spirit and intent of the zoning code and we'd be happy to answer any
questions great thank you any questions from the board hearing none may I have a public testimony Madam chair and members of the board for the record my name is Jeremy bbery I am the Rosendale Community engagement specialist for the office of Neighborhood Services the applicant has
completed the community process which consisted of an abers meeting uh the abers meeting was held on November 7th where majority of the abers were in report and with one direct butter who did voice concerns regarding shadows and block sunlight as well as egress and encroachment on the buing property during construction uh Civic meeting was
not applicable to this project as they did not fall in a Civic catchment area our office has also received two letters of support from abuts thank you for your time and the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services would like to defer to the board for their judgment thank you yeah M chair we have a caller
on 617 645 your your um your mic is on are you looking to give testimony for this proposal my name yes um I'm at 133 Beach Street and we're direct to Butters to the property that's seeking the variance and we did
um object to the portion of the um addition that's in non- conforming um the property is so close to our driveway and they have utilized our property and trespassed to use it so I won't get into that anymore but also the sunlight I
mean he said it would M I don't know we didn't see the study so we don't know what minimally affecting us um would be um we've been in our home for 20 years um the my aunt who lives on the first floor is 82 years old she has a sun room and a kitchen that face that way and she
shouldn't be impacted by this addition when they can complete the addition on the non-conforming part of the property thank you I think so we have no additional raised hands at the
moment any other questions from the board would the applicant uh care to respond um yes um so what we'd uh like to refer the board to is uh there are additional letters of support on file that I submitted to the board staff in
addition uh with respect to the abing property at uh 133 Beach Street which is a two family um uh the distance between the two building buildings is 22 ft uh and the shadow study that we submitted confirmed the representation we made at
the community meeting which is that we didn't think that uh the addition being located the small portion of the addition being located within the sidey setback would create any significant Shadow Fall on the building next door and the shadow study that we submitted
shows that the impact is primarily uh to the driveway of that uh budding structure and as I said all the homes in the neighborhood have their driveway on the left side and um their uh uh non-conforming side yard on the right
side and that is also true of um the abuts property um on the um uh it has an insufficient side yard on its right side and it is a much deeper structure than my client's uh home and so my client's looking to have
a non-conforming sidey yard that extends deeper into the rear yard uh but is not out of character with the neighborhood and is essentially asking uh that their structure be allowed to be um in similar configuration to the homes around it
including the home to the right at 133 thank you questions from the board hearing none is there a motion Madam chair I'd like to per for a motion of approval is there a second second Mr
strid yes Miss B brazza yes the chair votes yes motion carries good luck thank you next we have case boa 167 4592 the address is 121 Harvard Avenue
if the applicant and or the representative of President would they please explain the case to the board good evening Madam chair and members of the board I'm attorney Margo Gillis from the law office of mcder quilty Miller and Hanley and we represent Jen Kine
Barbecue located at 121 Harvard AV in Austin members of the team are with me here tonight and Jen Karine barbecue is seeking relief for a conditional use permit on the second floor and variants for off street parking to open a restaurant in the Harvard Avenue Community commercial subd District so
these are the existing site plan and it was previously an office space and the renovations for this space will be on the interior and there will be no additional height to the building so we are seeking a conditional use permit for restaurant use on the
second floor as well as a variance for off street parking the restaurant use is already and allowed on the first floor so we just need the conditional use permit for the second floor so that the restaurant can operate on both
floors um the Gen barbecue is just a Korean restaurant that offers um the traditional Gen Korean barbecue grilling and so the first floor has the kitchen seating restrooms and a small storage space and on the second floor there's a
service station and a small storage bace and more seating um we are also obtaining a liquor license and um the hours of operation fit into the character character of the community uh Sunday through Thursday
they will be open starting at 11:00 a.m. with a closing time of 11:00 p.m. Friday and Saturday they are open a little later with an opening time of 11:00 a.m. and a closing time of 1:00 a.m. the restaurant has 219 total seats with 87 seats on the first floor and 132
seats on the second floor the mayor office may speak to this but we participated in the community process we held an abutters meeting on December 11th 2024 met with the Austin civic association on December 18th and met with the Bia on January 9th there
were no issues and the process was generally supportive thank you thank you any questions from the board hearing none may have public testimony Madame chair and board members sigy Johnson with the office of Neighborhood Services this petitioner
completed the on community process our office hosted an AB Butter's meeting on December 11th at which no concerns were raised they additionally presented to the Alon civic association which is the active Civic group in this area which is in non- opposition to The Proposal with that background we defer to the Judgment
of the board thank you thank you Alex uh good evening everyone my name is Alex Camara I am the district director for state representative Kevin Honan just wanted to come in to say uh the representative would like to be uh
recorded in um favor of this project uh particularly citing the benefit that it will have on the Harvard AV business district so thank you thank you we have no additional way stands with that may I have a motion withough
the support that the project is obtaining and that the use um works and it's appropriate to its neighborhood I'm going to propose a motion of uh approval i' like to put forth a motion of approval there second second thank you
Mr stbridge yes m b brazza yes chair votes yes motion carries the Lu next we have case boa 166 2652 with the address of 10 to 12 Bagel
Street if the applicant Andor their representative a present would they please explain to the Boy Yes uh good evening my name is David McNair I'm the home homeowner um the variance in this case the bottom line is we're trying to put a
shed Dormer on the third floor of this uh now existing two family house um I've owned the house since 1997 with my sister she's lived there continuously for those 28 years um yeah the sum total of it with the Dormers is that we'd
modernize the house we'd add living space we'd add add a home office dedicated home office uh we'd upgrade HVAC from a steam heat we'd add central air conditioning there's no air conditioning now uh we'd get a new roof we'd remove a deteriorating chimney on
the house and add high efficiency water heaters and the rest we'd also move a washer dryer to the main living floor um moreover you can see by one of the drawings I think we just went past when we bought the house many years ago we didn't do any work but the previous
owner had work uh done that was likely not to code so all of that would be remedied uh the variance uh is requested because we exceed the floor area ratio and uh Building height there's also a sidey yard insufficiency but again
there's no change of footprint on this renovation at all in fact there's no change on the exterior of the house except for the shed dormers on the third floor uh in terms of Precedence and neighborhood character um I live myself Direct across the street um I've already
done this at a single family home put up shed Dormers uh without issue um there's another house two doors down on Aldi Street that's perpendicular to it an entire third floor has been added a maner style roof was put in um that was
done within the last two years or so uh in terms of process um I applied for the building perment on November 9th 2023 so I'm about 14 months in um I've done the ERS meeting uh three people appeared two had no uh issue with the
project one objected uh based I guess about how the project would look uh that objector is not a direct butter he's two houses down and living in a home owned by his mother um I've been through the alsoa civic association meeting I'm not sure
their decision but um again that same person called in to object on that there were no other objections I believe but I'm not certain that another neighbor uh has has made a comment by email in support of the project um he is a close neighbor who's
directly across the street but again not in the butter so I'd ask that the board allow the uh variance of this project to move forward thank you questions from the board hearing none may I have public testimony Madame chair members of the board sigy Johnson with the office of
Neighborhood Services this petitioner completed the on community process or office hosted in a Butter's meeting on October 28th at which one a butter expressed opposition based on the perceived loss of a mature Tree on the property as well as the altering of the roof line of the property uh other
abutters did not make any comments in support or opposition uh the proposal was presented to the Alon civic association who chose not to take a position and with that background we defer to the Judgment of the board thank you thank you and M chair we have no
raised hands at the moment would that may I have a motion chair like to put for a motion of approval is there a second second Mr strige yes Miss B Braza yes chair votes
yes the motion carries thank you next we have case boa 167 3742 with the address of 64 EOS Street if the applicant and or their representative was present they please
explain the case to the board hello my name is Emily hores and I am the owner of 64 Etna and I live in the first floor unit um the two violations we were cited for were a
Article 1 Section n um where Max allowed F exceeded for a finished basement and finished atct and a Max allowed number of habitable stories exceeded two and a half stories Max um so we're asking for a variance for the following reasons our house was
built in 1920 so the lot is already too small non-conforming if you wanted to look at the table on a z.0 above um and you'll see the numbers in red for that it's so it's already non-conforming um the lot according to
the city is 3 9991 Square ft and we're supposed to have 5,000 um our architect measured it as 3994 um and when our architect was measuring the gross area um as you can see her
numbers don't line up with what the city of Boston had recorded and I discussed it with her because what she did was she included the the um area in the basement as well as the area in the unfinished attic which she should not have done so we went over it and she believes that if
you're just looking at the first and second floors it does match that number of 2368 and what we're actually proposing is we're just proposing that we finish the attic we're not making any changes to the exterior we're not adding a dormer we're not changing the lot size
at all um and with the proposed Renovations um she believes that the the actual proposed square footage would be around 2950 which would still exceed the F so we would need a variant still um the reason that we're asking for a
variance on that grounds is um we actually live with our best friends who we looked at the property with they have four children they live on the second floor um which as existing has uh two legal bedrooms and one front room and
we're just trying to add two bedrooms in the Attic so that they can live comfortably with their family um the other violation we were cited for was exceeding two and a half stories which I think that was actually an incorrect violation because our house is two and a
half stories basement is not counted in stories um and we're not changing the exterior of the building at all so I'm not sure why that was flagged as a violation um when we're not changing anything to the exterior of the building
so this is the existing uh floor plan for the second floor um and if you scroll further down um this is what the attic looks like now and then what we're proposing and the existing outside of
the building if you want to keep going through the plans um all of this will be remaining the same um right so to confirm you're only doing interior changes right and only to the attic um so the other thing that happened when we went in in October I
went into inspectional services to figure out why we hadn't received a refusal letter yet um and the inspectional services department raised the issue of maybe the basement might be counted towards livable space and I
panicked and the inspectional services department added um legalized extension into the the basement that was completed by a previous owner so what's going on in the basement is that they put down flooring um but it's not bedroom space I
don't know whether it counts as livable space or not but we didn't do anything down there to change it um and we're not planning on making it into a bedroom space or anything of that kind um so I I don't know whether that should be counted towards the F or not um but
we're not planning on doing anything with it so the inspectional services wanteded to include that to make sure that we weren't penalized for the actions of previous owners um we have put in like we've borrowed against our
retirement and um taking out a home equity loan um what we're planning on doing is moving the stairs um in the second floor from where they are in the front room to the middle so I think this shows the ex the
proposed changes if you want to zoom in on this one this is the electrical PL so we might have gone too far but it it does show if you want to go back up one more so that's where the stair will be
moved to the middle of the house um and if you want to go back up one more again this shows we're not changing the exterior whatsoever um I believe that the third the second floor and the third floor proposed
changes are still um previous in the plans if you wouldn't mind scrolling back up a page or two any question from the board no I just I just have a um a a
comment where um in terms of the F uh I think it's good the way it's been cited um okay whenever you do even if it's an existing situation that you inherited if if you're a basement is consider habitable
you probably have do what's the height of the ceilings uh it's I I don't know but I don't believe it's s feet and there's no heat down there so okay so it's in a storage okay all right um you know I
think the idea that you were cited for the fact of like extending Living Spaces in the basement and in the Attic that's just going to trigger f because that's considered right additional square footage um if you were to make it
occupiable I would just say make sure that you have you do it per code but I think it's it's good that you had been cited just to correct any past um work that had been done in your house in regards to the in regards to the two and a half stories what I'm seeing it is two
and a half stories that's something that you can take back to um to the inspector but for this purpose of this hearing I think it's good that you're they're you're relying on the conservative measures of the of the project to be approved so um that's the only comment I
have for the applicant okay thank you yeah and I I think this um this shows what the finished atct will look like this slide so the stairs will come up in the middle and there'll be two bedrooms added just in the middle section um
where the ceiling height um will be conforming to code and then new windows will be put in that are our code compliant as well um and there'll be a play area kind of off to the side but we're not adding a dormer and we're leaving the rest as storage and mechanical space so that's really all
we're doing is moving the stairs and adding those bedrooms in the front and back of the building with Windows do you have a section uh a crosssection through that player area and the drawings let me see I if I can find a cross-section
yeah it's keep going so keep going right here okay yeah great okay you have a cross-section okay um I just wanted to make sure that you have a crosssection that you have uh height to go through to go upstairs to the attic um just want to make sure that you have
some good construction documentation for construction I don't have any further questions chair D thank you uh may we have public testimony Madam chair and board members Johnson with the office of Neighborhood Services this petitioner completed the on community process uh we
hosted an AB Butters meeting on the 17th of December at which no concerns were raised the proposal is presented to the Brighton alustin Improvement Association which voted to be supportive with that background we defer to the Judgment of the board thank you thank you madam chair we have no raised hands at the
moment thank you with that may I have a motion Madam chair I like to put for a motion of approval there a second second Mr stri yeah Miss B Braza yes chair votes yes the motion carries good luck
ma'am thank you next we have a red discussion scheduled for 5:00 pm that would be case boa1 161
3879 with the address of 43 to 45 Wood Avenue if the applicant and or the their representative of president will they please explain Madame chair members of the board Patrick Sweeney of marsy Sweeney
261 Main Street Charlestown appearing on behalf of the owners Larry celester and his wife Aisha celester uh members of the board this property uh was approved for construction in late 2019 and a two
family house was constructed uh at the time uh there was an omission of a driveway for the second unit there was an approval on on an a driveway on the left as you face the
property um and at a point in time the applicant went back to the board however the uh plans that were submitted at that time were somewhat confusing because the applicant had already there was on this
property uh curb cuts uh and they're not proposed the applicant today was able to uh file an additional plan showing that those curb cuts are in place uh there had been a question as to the loss of parking on
the street however with the fact that the P the where it says proposed curb cut on on this plan there is a plan that was brought into ISD today the engineer just finished it this morning and in that plan it shows that these curb cuts
are actually there the um curb Cuts will allow for Tandem parking spaces as the driveway area that's in existence is approximately 50 fet in length as is the uh proposed driveway on the right side
of this two family dwelling uh the uh proponents are on uh line right now uh owners of the property um as I said this uh I think when this was previously before the board on this issue of the
additional parking there was confusion uh in in large part because of the plan that was submitted um the uh the violations are
non-conforming and insufficient open space so can you confir irm the driveway on the the left exists yes but I'm looking I'm looking at construction photos and in the construction
photos um there are no there are no curb Cuts was that were the were the curb Cuts done during construction yes and pic approved those okay so pic
approved the two curb Cuts correct so what we're looking for is relief from the zoning on the right side as I say it it actually should have been in that initial filing when they when they appealed they appealed to construct
this building for whatever reason someone missed it right and and um we did receive Bob's um from BD's recommendation on on the project um and we also received be Boston plan
Department's recommendation which was to deny the project but given the situation that you're in regarding pic giving you approval already for two curb cuts um I can see why you're in front of us to
actually Implement those that tandem driveway okay I don't have any any further questions thank so just to understand there are curve cuts on both sides of the house at this yes Mr stri they ra okay uh may we have
public testimony Madame chair and members of the board for the record my name is Jeremy bbery I am the H Park Community engagement specialist for the office of Neighborhood Services the applicant has completed the community process which consisted of an abundance meeting held on July 18th with very few in attendance
no questions or concerns were raised the project then went before uh the Roseberry ruskindale Radcliff neighborhood ass assciation uh where they voted to support the project uh there is no there are no uh letters of opposition or support received at this time thank you for your time and the
mayor's office of Neighborhood Services would like to defer to the board for their judgment at this time thank you Aisha you looking to give testimony here can you hear me yes yeah so I am actually the owner um along with my husband Larry celester and um you know
has been a long process we've we've tried to go through every um thing that you know has needed to be done we've followed all the processes uh and um we're just looking for Relief to to ensure that we're able to have um these driveways thank thank
you any other public comments no additional raised hands at the moment thank you any other questions from the board I mean I uh is Caroline online yes yes um Caroline I mean I mean this is a really interesting question
regarding the order of things um I would imagine that you would need zoning relief first before pic can actually approve a curb cut um how how did the how did The Ordering of
things I don't know how did the Departments not kind of talk to one another I mean that's a good question I I don't have an answer to that I that's something I can look into yeah um but I unfortunately don't have a immediate answer to that yeah and especially if
the applicant said that um the the legal council for the applicant said that um it was an error of the applicant to not have submitted the curb cut in the beginning when they requested their first um variant to build the
project so okay so I I would love if if there's a way that you can get back to us on this in terms of the ordering things in the department between departmental approval I would I would I would imagine that it would be first zba and then pic um but please correct me if
I'm wrong I would love to understand that I'm sure my colleagues would would also want to understand that process yes for sure definitely tomorrow that can be something I work on great thank you um chair D I don't have any further questions okay with that is there a
motion I'd like to put forward a motion of approval given that Bob from BTD did review this project and also with the fact that pic has already approved it approved the curb Cuts I'm going to move forward with the motion of approval is there a
second yes Mr stbridge yeah Miss B brazza yes chair votes yes the motion carries good luck thank you thank you board all right have a good night thank you good night
night