The Bolton Street project involved the construction of a nine-unit multifamily building totaling approximately 10,000 square feet. The design featured a three-story structure with a mix of one, two, and three-bedroom units, utilizing brick to maintain consistency with the local architectural style. Pedro Lucas from the architectural firm emphasized enhancements to the pedestrian experience, including the addition of greenery along the facade. Despite these efforts, the project encountered opposition during the public testimony phase.

Sigy Johnson from the Mayor’s Office noted that the project had undergone community outreach, with a meeting held on May 9 where concerns about roof decks were voiced. Melissa L from Councilor Flynn’s office echoed these concerns, articulating opposition based on feedback from neighbors and the St. Vincent’s Lower End Neighborhood Association. She highlighted issues with noise and police involvement due to parties on nearby roof decks as significant grounds for opposition, emphasizing the potential quality of life impacts.

In defense, the developer asserted that the proposed height of 40 feet complied with zoning regulations for the multifamily residential district and that the design maintained the neighborhood’s character. They noted revisions to the plans, including the repositioning and reduction of the roof decks in response to community concerns. Support letters from neighbors who welcomed the new housing and design elements were also referenced. The board, balancing these inputs, approved the project with conditions for further review by the Boston Planning Department, particularly concerning site planning and the visibility of the head house.

Another topic involved a proposal for 175F Street, which aimed to develop nine residential units with six parking spaces across four parcels of land. Attorney Mark Laass presented the project, highlighting revisions made following community review, such as removing a half top floor that had caused a height violation and repositioning private roof decks. The design, described as contemporary with wood and brick materials, aligned with a broader city initiative to increase density near transit. Despite its alignment with planning studies from 2017 and meeting usable open space requirements, the project also faced scrutiny, emphasizing the board’s role in balancing development with community interests.

The meeting also addressed several other significant cases. For instance, on Mount Vernon Street, the board approved plans for zoning relief to allow for additional living space and a third bedroom in a lower-level unit. The design included a roof deck accessible only to unit three, with a proviso that the deck sides be inset five feet from the edge.

In another case, a proposal for updating an existing two-family dwelling at 139 to 141 Min Street was supported by local neighborhood associations and endorsed by representatives from Councilor offices. The project included interior renovations and a vertical addition to create necessary living space for a growing family. Despite an increase in the overall building height, the community process had not raised significant opposition.

Further, the board discussed a roof deck proposal on River Street, aimed at converting a section of the roof into an outdoor space. This project was framed as a response to noise and visual disturbances from adjacent commercial properties. Notably, no opposition was voiced during the community meeting, and a civic association had expressed support.

In a case involving 1086 High Park Avenue, attorney Derek Small represented the owners seeking relief to rebuild a rear addition damaged by a burst pipe. With the community showing support and no concerns raised during the meeting, the board unanimously approved the proposal.

Lastly, a proposal for a two-family residential project on Glenley Terrace was discussed. The vacant lot’s development included tandem parking arrangements and aimed to blend into the existing environment with traditional design elements. Despite some residents voicing concerns over parking, density, and safety, the Brighton Neighborhood Improvement Association supported the project. The board approved the proposal, subject to a design review by the Boston Planning and Development Agency.