e e the city of Boston Bo zoning board and appeal hearing for April 30th 2024 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 recording in progress remotely via the zoom webinar event platform this hearing is also being live streamed in order to ensure this hearing of the board is open to the public members of the public May access hearh through telephone in progress through V 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 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 out unless administratively unmuted when asked to comment board members applicants and their attorneys or Representatives will participate in the hearing as panelists and they will appear alongside the presentation materials when speaking panelists are strongly encouraged to keep video on while presenting to the board as with our in-person meetings comments 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 off for 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 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 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 stambridge 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 okay Mr stbridge good morning Madam chair pres good morning Mr Valencia good morning Madam chair pres good morning uh Miss B Braza good morning Madam chair president good morning Mr Collins morning Madam chair pres good morning M Mahal do I have okay Miss panado good morning Madam chair present uh is is Miss Mahal on today Jessica or someone else okay well uh can you reg handar if you're on I I don't see it all right um I don't know you will reach out Madam chair okay well we will proceed with a six member board uh starting with the extensions and with that um we will go to the extension schedule for 9:30 uh I will read I'll read all of them into the record um excuse me fol uh I'll read them all together inst the record one after another um and then I'll turn it back to M chair if there are any questions from the board members first we have thank you all welcome uh we begin with case vaa 131 [Music] 057 with the address of 29 Hamilton Street next we have case boa 122 4197 with the address of 73 stord Street next we have case boa 12910 93 with the address of 41 Williams Avenue then we have case boa 8688 70 with the address um sorry we have two companion cases um again case boa 86 8870 with the address of 810 kbur Street along with that we have case boa 86 8875 with the address of 812 Canterbury Street then we have case boa 109 6128 the address of 10 Rockland Street next we have case boa 101 9220 with the address of 645 River Street next we have case boa 9328 44 with the address of 192 Gladstone Street then we have case bo8 101 6543 with the address of 70 Utah Street next we have case boa 773 858 with the address of 6 evone Street and finally for the extension we have case boa 101 8350 with the address of 38 to 40 Spring Street that's what we have Madam chair thank you uh if there are no questions can I in uh suggest a motion a single motion to Grant the extensions as requested Madam chair I'll make a single motion to Grant the extensions as requested is there second second Mr stbridge yeah Miss Valencia Mr Valencia yes Miss B brazza yes Mr Collins yes is Miss Mahal with us okay Mr uh Miss penado yes chair also votes yes motion carries next we'll move on to the recommendations scheduled for 9:30 from recent subcommittee um we be again I'll I'll read through the all of the cases um what was what the decision was and then we vote um and I'll turn it back to Madam chair uh we begin with case bway 156 6165 with the address of 16 cook stre which was approved was a provisor of of eliminating uh the overhang on the deck that is being that is being requested then we have case boa 15 [Music] 42426 with the address of 82 Washington Street that was approved was a provisor of approval by parks riew by Parks and Recreation next we have case boa 45 [Music] 2448 with the address of 332 to 34 Summer Street that was approved uh with Proviso of screening and buffering and with bpda design review next we have case boa 155 4386 with the address of 515 East 1 street that was approved then we have case boa 156 8248 with the address of 36 to 42 West Broadway that was approved then we have case boa 157 3788 with the address of 417 to 423 C West West Broadway that was that was also approved next we have case boa 157 3885 with the address of 18 Pawn Circle that was approved then we have case b 151 8380 with the address of 104 child Street this case was deferred until May 16th next we have case bo8 1521 1624 with the address of 379 to 381 blue Avenue that wasn't this wasn't Prov next we have case bo8 155 [Music] 4816 with the address of 4 to 10 min Street was the case was approved next we have case boa 157 5041 with the address of 46 chicken toet Street which wasn't approved the we have case boa 152 9077 with the address of 162 to 164 Fairmont Street which was approved then we have two companion cases case boa 156 6270 with the address of 14 WF Street along with that along with that we have bo8 156 4951 both were approved next we have case boa 156 [Music] 4366 with the address of 32 lry Avenue was approved finally we have case boa 156 3736 with the address of 210 North Harvard Street which was approved Madam chair that that is what we have from the SubCom recommendations thank you may I have a motion mam should I make a motion to approve all the recommendation from the sub committee may I have a second second Mr stbridge yes Mr Valencia yes Miss B brazza yes Mr Collins yes Miss pado yes have we been joined by Miss Mahal okay hearing none the chair also uh votes yes the motion carries that then we shall move on to the hearing scheduled for 9:30 um to begin with we have two companion cases the first being case boa 153 8686 with the address of 86 Estoria Street along with that we have case boa 153 8740 with the address also of 86 Street if the applicant and representativ pres would they please explain for the board yes my name is h k Bratt I am the architect for the project and representing the owner nataline naline Francis I uh first of all she bought this property in uh 2018 and at the time she bought it o at the time she bought it there were existing conditions uh that were there that that Direct relates to the violations and the uh while we're here first of all the basement was occupied that was an existing unit a two-bedroom unit secondly the other uh item that was existing was the rear porch was enclosed when she purchased it so uh in basically everything was existing however it was not C compliant so we had to recite it as a violation and that's why we we are here to uh uh today now we plan on making improvements uh that will uh satisfy hopefully the uh Zoning for uh first of all we are installing uh co- compliant uh exit windows at both bedrooms we plan on enlarging the uh entryway uh that exit onto the driveway secondly we plan and most importantly we're going to install a sprinkler system uh one of the violations relates to exitway access uh which I think we have there's a driveway that you can access out the unit into the street the smallest dimension of that driveway is 15.9 and the widest dimension of that driveway is 18 uh uh 18 18 ft so the idea to incorporate changes that we think um will improve the existing condition of the three family of the basement unit and provide adequate and safe uh erress for that basement uh for that basement unit great thank you are there are there questions from the board I I do have a question regarding um who's uh it is is the is an existing occupany in regards to the basement is it um is it being rented out or is it within kind of within the family an extended family member that lives there I don't know it's being rented the basement is they rent it as is the uh the first floor as well it's important that it is rent rented because the owner needs those rents to satisfy her her uh her mortgage yeah so um you know I don't see any kind of issue with um having a habitable kind of basement I do I do see some concerns regarding um requesting a relief for building code violation um because I think that uh they can be remedy and you know it might just be that there has to be a sacrifice with the amount of bedrooms in the basement but I do think that you since you are creating improvements that you should be able to do it without any kind of building co- violations right so that's my only comment to that's my comment to like my my peers and and and everyone great thanks any other questions hearing none may I have public testimony good morning chair Madam good morning Madam chair members of the board can you guys hear me yes we can how you doing how you guys doing Eric James mayor's office of the neighborhood services um so for this project 86 Historia they we uh contact so they did not meet with the greater mapan neighborhood Council or the um West Seldon and the city neighborhood association as uh reported by both neighborhood councils and associations they are requesting for the applicant to defer to uh successfully commute successfully complete the community process um and meet with both those neighborhood associations uh so at this time the May's office would like to defer to the Judgment of the board on this matter thank you thank you any other raised hands I'm sure I have no raised hands okay uh would the applicant like to briefly respond to that before we make a motion uh good question I we're willing to do that I'm not sure the owner whether or not she's on this hearing and thaten are you on I I think it's important for us to go through the community process so uh I I think it's important for us to to meet with the neighborhood and present the project hopefully getting uh support from the uh from the neighborhood and U and the neighborhood organizations the two laborhood organizations as well okay um well that may I have a motion Madam chair I'd like to put forward a motion of deferral but I also would like for the applicant to explore a basement unit without any kind of U violation to use this time to explore that Avenue but the motion to put forward is a deferral is there a second thank you Mr stbridge uh yes Mr Valencia yes m b Braza yes uh Mr Collins yes Miss pado yes chair also votes yes the motion carries uh is there a date for Mr Pratt yes Madam chair June 4th would be the next would be the date Mr Pratt does that is that acceptable yes so long as we can uh get on of the neighbor groups and present to them before that date I assume well that's please please please connect with uh Mr James then the on us uh person yeah thank you I don't know but you should connect with him offline offline thank you we will do that thank you thank you and um just a just to note that uh we we have become a six- member board so we are a six- member board today uh for any additional applicants uh Mr St yes Madam chair will go next to case boa 151 3573 with the address of 333 Freeport Street if the applicant is put and their represent is present will they explain the case to the board pleas he can you raise your hand if you're on for this yeah you can unmute yourself as a panelist hello um yes um my my my uh my lawyer I think he's uh I think he's on have to wait you know what his name is so we can look for him I made Scott go ahead okay great can you hear me now yes we can oh thank you I'm sorry you know I'm not a zoom expert we practiced yesterday but it didn't work so good morning every everybody my name is Scott Holmes and I'm the attorney that represents Duke NN who is in the middle of trying to uh change a part of a piece of property that he owns at 333 Freeport Street in Dorchester I'm not sure if the board is familiar with the uh Freeport Street but this is a section that dub tailes off a doav and then connects to uh marsi Boulevard uh he bought this property honestly with a hope hope of having um body art and body piercing on the ground floor with uh the second floor being available to him uh to R to his brother or to his father uh he didn't realize at the time in all honesty that this was going to be uh something where we' need to go before the zoning board of appeals with because for some reason this particular area is it's forbidden to have this particular business uh I've done a lot of research in this area uh so we're not trying to plop a a a a what Society at once looked at was uh with some negativity which was that it was uh growing a bad crowd or the wrong people um Mr wind owns a holistic ink that's on doav and the reason why he's been trying to make this shift is he does not own that building and there's a threat that is landlord is going to convert it into Condominiums and so he went looking for another place to operate his business uh he did submit yesterday a lengthy three pages with a lot of uh neighborhood work that we did in order to gain support you'll see even though it's kind of hard to see all the abuts have agreed to it uh and don't find any offense with it the building could use some love and that's what he h hopes to do if I could just address a couple other things please um this is a reasonable zoning relief because it's it it's minimal to achieve the use of this house if you're not familiar with this I urge you to go on to Google and just look at what free Port Street is it's really it's there are sections set up for uh for industry uh small Industries it does house um a business right next to him on the other side of everine street is a uh it comes up as uh everine street address but it actually is 337 Freeport it houses four businesses in this nice building and no objection to that but I think an equal application of zoning rules and laws would be would be uh a wonderful break and a wonderful thing for this section of Dorchester I know that this bylaws or this this particular rules were written I believe from my research in 2002 but times have changed and Mr Mr Holmes why why don't you pause and uh let's see if we have questions from the board please thank you any any questions or concerns from the board okay hearing none let's let's take public testimony Madam chair members of the board Conor Newman with the mayor's office of neighborhood services at this time the mayor stops defer to the Judgment of this board on hosted a Butter's meeting on December 6 of 2023 there are no objections raised that that others me from what I understand I believe the applicant has been in contact with local Civic group uh we do not have any letter of support or opposition on file from a Butters or that civic association with that information will defer to the board of this time thank you thank you is this Mr Hampton uh thank you madam chair members of the board Jeff Hampton bpda uh we're in support of this um I want to give a little Clarity on where this building is it's really right next to the intersection of where marsi and Freeport Street come together there are you know there's gas station on the corner and there's a union couple of houses and then uh I think there's a uh real estate office right at uh right next door the reason why it's forbidden it's because it's a residential zoning District if you go in on that street it's a one family Zone owning area so we're in support of it because it AB buts uh it's on freep Port it doesn't go into Clam Point at all so uh I just want to give a little Clarity on where exactly this building is uh it's on a major thoroughfare the entrance to the expressway is right there too so um but I I do want to stay for the record that the bpda is in support of this thank you Mr Hampton uh any other questions from the board hearing none may have a motion motion to approve I have a second second Mr stbridge yes Mr Valencia yes Miss B brazza yes Mr Collins yes Miss pado yes chair also votes yes the motion carries good luck thank you much next we have exuse me case boa 156 7925 with the address of 20 Pearl Street if the applicant and L the representative was pres explain to the board please uh good morning Madam chair members of the board uh my name is James Christopher with the business 686 Architects with the business address of 10 fors Road and brry uh here uh tonight on behalf of Mario puski who is the former owner of this property um the precipice for this project is that the property is has been taxed as a three family since 2011 the owner thought the legal occupancy was a three family the property was sold as a three family and during the sale um the fact that the legal occupancy was a two family came to light um so as such we've filed applications with the city to correct the to correct the uh occupancy from a two to a three legally um there is no work to happen the building has three kitchens already uh it's set up as a family the previous owner was living there with his mother uh so they were using it as a two family he lived with his family and she operated in in the other unit um we did install a sprinkler system um for as a life safety measure and that work is already completed um but this is just for the legal change in occupancy um we held an a Butters meeting in met with Columbia sa Hill um uh where there were some concerns about the future of the project but this uh owner and and current uh um setup is to change it to three um and should any other projects be coming then that applicant would have to file uh to do that thank you any questions from the board hearing none we have public testimony yes Madam chair members of the board Conor new with the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services this time the mayor's office like to defer to the judgement of this board some background information the community process on host an abutters meeting uh February 20th uh stemming from that abutters meeting we did not receive any letters of support or an opposition um some concerns as the applicant's representation mentioned involved who owned the building and what the future of the building would eventually be went to the Columbia Savin Hill civic association planning committee that narrowly voted to support and then went on to the cca's broader General membership which voted to support with a wider margin uh from that I will defer to the board at this time thank you Mr Newman can you just spell out CH blah blah blah for the yes that's a Columbia Savin Hill civic association thank you sorry I'll avoid using that abbreviation thank you uh any other raised hands Jessica have no raised hands no okay that oh I'm sorry go ahead noo man members of boardly from councel Fitz derald's office off like you on record and support this proposal thank you thank you uh with that may I have a motion I have a second second m Mr stbridge yes Mr Valencia yes Miss B brazza yes Mr Collins yes Miss pado yes chair also votes yes the motion carries thank you T next we have case beway 156 8342 with the address of 134 to 140 Smith Street is the applicant and those representative pres who explain to the bo good morning mad chair members of the board uh we are proposing a two story addition to an existing uh single story building uh this building is about 80 ft by 26 ft uh in week and uh the two oper stories will be occupied by two apartments each uh two bedrooms uh on each apartment there are slightly under 800 square ft and the first Flor will be made as a restaurant uh the existing entire floor is currently occupy a the uh a bar restaurant we will reduce the size of that uh business to about 4,000 sare ft in add two Studios apartment uh you can see from that elevation uh we this building is adjacent to several highrise uh buildings and one immediately across the street from it on the SP Street uh also on the left left hand side if you standing in front of oron Street there are multiple ra houses that are about three stories in height we met uh with the landmar commission this building is in a historic uh Landmark district and we will not be able to make any changes uh to the existing uh single history building uh therefore we will preserve uh restore uh that single history and we will build on top of it uh the setback on work to the street as requested by the landmarks will March the uh existing uh Street wall on that street for the W houses and the height is consistent as well with all all those buildings residential buildings in har Street uh this according to the lmar records this is a contemporary uh intrusion uh there are records that the building was originally built in 1898 as a storage building however there is a subsequent record for 1927 that make reference to a business a store uh uh proposal on it and I believe that is the accurate record uh for it uh so now again as I said we would preserve the existing structure and build on top respecting the setback for the h houses on the left side of devopment uh the violations are standard uh this is a Transit oriented uh development uh we are within less than a quarter of a mile of public transportation uh there is obviously uh no parking we have a Rea violation floor area ratio as expected in usable open space and with that I conclude my presentation I'll be happy to answer any questions thank you Mr Santana any questions from the board hearing none may I have public testimony yes Madam chair members of the board Conor Newman with the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services this time the mayor is s to defer to the Judgment of this board some background information the community process own s hosting a Butters meeting on June 8th of 2023 a few concerns were raised about what residents felt is too much development going on in this area uh referencing a couple of bpda projects nearby as well as Shadow impact to the ab budding apartment building um afterwards we did hear from a uh from a neighbor and a butter in uh who's concerned about uh potential blocking of sunlight into her apartment as well as concerns about construction impacts uh the Community Alliance of Hill uh Express that they're in support of this application um the Mission Hill Neighborhood Housing Services uh did not support uh because they felt the units will eventually be rented out to undergraduates which they remain opposed to um with that we'll defer to the board at this time thank you thank you hello go ahead sorry Lily Speedman with councilor Jin's office um I would like to read a statement on her behalf uh this proposal is the type of development that the city needs more of a mixed use building serves the many needs of residents both current and future the applicants proposed addition of housing on their site serves as a great example of the opportunity long-term respective Property Owners on Mission Hill have to expand housing in the neighborhood that is so greatly needed I ask the board and its members to vote in support of this proposal thank you thank you anyone else I have no additional raiseed hands okay any questions from the board hearing none we have a motion Madam chair I like to before a motion of approval with a provis that the project underg goes bu and landmarks commission review du oh thank you uh Mr stbridge uh yes Madam Mr Valencia yes Miss B brazza yes Mr Collins yes Miss pado yes chair also votes yes the motion carries thank you next we have case vaa 1572 with the address of 100 St alonsus Street this is an article 80 case the applicant and the representative explain the case to the board good morning um Madam chair members of the board Attorney John genie on behalf of the proposal at 100 S Bon Street it's also known in numbers as 1558 tremon Street Mission Hill uh this is an article 80 live project that was approved by the bpda board this past October the property is made up of two Parcels which when combined will be a 20687 ft parcel one parcel is Zone multif family residential and the other that fronts Tremont Street is neighborhood shoping this property is located at the corner of St alons and Tremont Street with Pontiac Street to the left as I stated the this proposal went through a more than 2-year article 80 process which commenced with an Loi which was filed on July 22nd 2021 The Proposal is for a six-story mixed use building containing 95 residential apartments with approximately 3,228 Square ft of first floor retail and 53 off street parking spaces 44 of those spaces will be designated to the Boston Basilica of Our Lady of Perpetual Help on Mission Church um under a prior agreement the benefits associated with the proposal are significant including 16 affordable units 13 are at 70% Ami and three will be at 60% Ami as you can see from the drawings the development team together with the bpda staff BPD and Public Works uh spent a lot of time on not only the design of the building but also the improvements to the public domain these improvements include the construction and expansion of sidewalks for a better pedestrian experience the installation of Street trees watering the development the expansion of an existing bus shelter a $155,000 donation to the city parks funds and over $49,000 to install a 15 space Bike Share station this building will be lead go certified it will be all electric heating cooling water saving features increased insulation electric car charges in garage for 25% of the parking and the other 75% will be EV ready additionally it's designed for the installation of of solar working with BTD and the bpda transportation for a designated pickup and drop off spaces or Uber and lift this proposal is a planet's dream checking all the boxes for the mayor's office for the mayor's housing goals by allowing greater density on major thare that is served well by Transportation with a 3 minute walk to the green line of briam circle and a 5minute walk to the orange line look at Rock Crossing in addition to several bus lines located at tremon Street This truly is a Walker's Paradise all of this without any displacement this proposal transforms a blighted vacant site into much needed housing with significant affordable housing at that at this point I'd like to turn it over to Kalos of rebe from Embark to walk through the plans and thanks again for the opportunity to present this proposal Carlos hello good morning everyone thank you foring us out today I'm caros I'm here representing the bar today and would you mind going to the plans if not I can share them on my screen to Bubble uh so that's the we through that with the assumtion okay I'm not sure is the is the AR presenting or what can't really hear you Carlos yeah can you hear me now we can it's very very faint okay sorry about that whose screen is this showing this is the we're looking at the plans yeah whose screen is this is this yours no you are not able to share your screen this is what you submitted to us yeah I understand yeah just scroll further down the plans are after these we're doing we're presenting today 95 units with a mix of 59 Studios 221 beds and 14 ceds they are even distributed throughout the plants and we have two levels of parking one level is access from Pontiac Street at the higher level and then the other other parking level is accent from St alons at the lower one as John had mentioned we have a designated to score one page up please one more oh sorry it's in the other direction we're scrolling going to the first floor there you go thank you we've gone through a rigorous process to bpda for these public improvements one of those has been a full activated corner at the base there with with a over 3,000 ft Cafe and then with a separate Lobby entry off of St alanes which is at level in grade with the parking that we have right there we also are sh a dedicated in building loading moving and trash and with an INB building bike storage which meets the ppta standards and that should be that should be it thank you okay thank you are questions from the board in terms of the exterior design M okay go ahead okay um are these units uh rental or home [Music] ownership Mr the rental Mr St sorry thank um any other questions from the board I do if the bpda project manager can speak about the community process because you know we received some letters regarding um kind of a change of address and some concerns regarding um communication regarding today's hearing so it would be great if the bpda project manager can speak on um Community process and what happened with the shift of the address believe um mrat said Dan panco should be on this call I can address the uh address change if that's okay with you yeah so when this and it was brought up by the commission Lin sub Mission Hill y so as with any project when you're when you go through the article 80 process the address at that time was 1558 trema when you submit your plans to ISD as you know as an architect the address is established where the front door is for the uh entrance to the building so that is the the St alonsus address came from so it's just an ISD internal thing the address you know the building itself could be named anything down the road but it is you know okay I think I think the bpda project manager would like to speak so yes I think Mr panco is on thank you let's hear from him uh can you can you hear me we can okay yeah good morning uh Madam chair uh members of the board Daniel Pano here project bpda I was um uh yes I I think um uh the proponent can speak on the change of of address I I was not aware of the change of address however in our internal review um you know the project did get bpda approval however uh they made the changes throughout the process and the planning and Urban Design uh supported these changes while there was some opposition that did complete requirements of article 80 and we felt that that it was appropriate an appropriate development um and yes we were aware of a lot of opposition uh we did communicate uh through our bpda process the meetings that we held the public meetings and all the changes that were made internally uh with the proponent were uh distributed to to the community um again Madam chair I cannot speak on on the change of address I wasn't too aware of that however we do uh like I said we do uh have uh went through the community process and we were aware of the the the opposition um however again through our article 80 we do host meetings and we do publish them online and uh if folks uh you know our in our bpda website uh database they get the distribution of the meeting so do you have so Mr I think I think the question is about Community the community piece more so than the address I don't know it's part of some of the critique has been that the because of the address change there was not enough notification for the communities to be present today to speak on the project so um I just wanted to understand that that duration and then also if you can speak on um what was on record of the amount of opposition versus support right and I and what I was again I in terms of the of the address change I think the proponent has more information on that in as bpda we didn't know much about this uh address change until recently um again I I don't I can't speak on that um however on the opposition yes a lot of it came from the history that the proponent has with the with with the community and um again in terms of design in terms of uh were we able to manage changes which you know what we recommend that they they did um there was a lot of opposition because of the long history that that the proponent has with the community and you and I guess there's some history there and that was a lot most of the opposition again the way we communicate our our public meetings is through the BPA website and again I I can't I don't have a an answer on on the address because I I wasn't uh you know we we weren't aware we passed it uh on our bpda board as 50/50 Street the way it was advertised uh by by the zba you know we we just had we had anything to do with that okay well I I see the uh chair of one of our Civic groups there so maybe we can open it up to public testimony yes Madam chair members of the board Conor Newman with the mayor's office neighorhood services this time the mayor is also defer to the Judgment of this board uh as you heard this has gone through a lengthy uh bpda Le community process uh steming back from I believe uh March of 2022 with the first impact Advisory Group um throughout that process there's been revisions uh to this project I understand that the uh applicant has worked with the nearby Church to provide parking uh for uh parishioners um we did receive that letter from the Community Alliance at Mission Hill and I believe they'll be able to speak more to that raising uh their opposition to this proposal sting concerns about the height and the style units being proposed I believe mostly Studios that they feel are not conducive uh to having long-term uh residents stay in the community with that we'll defer to the board at this time thank you so can I hear from Bruce bicker staff who seems to he was a member of the iag I I just want to understand that process too if you're available Mr vicker staff just cuz he is he on I don't see his hand raised oh all right well then let's keep going and you can work on that I see Mr bbor Mr Martin hello uh Martin bbor M chair members of the board I'm here for the Community Alliance of Mission Hill and as was mentioned we voted uh anonymously against this uh this proposal and this was in line with many submitted letters submitted letters from the community uh I want to quickly mention the change of address we were completely unaware of it uh as you saw on the on the on the plans that were shown was stamped of 100 uh s Alonso but it was really 1558 so I'm concerned that many people wouldn't attend today because they just didn't know I heard complaints from Neighbors who were notified and others who were not notified and uh even more confusing I saw on one of the slides that the address was marked as 130 Cent and street so I think it's very confusing uh regarding the reason for our opposition it was not so much about the reputation it was mostly about that the the project was too high too dense there's too little parking I think there's only nine parking spaces dedicated to 95 units it's all rental and uh we are concerned that the transiency in the neighborhood will further increase and last thing is um we're also concerned whether there's a like a de restriction in place that has been discussed to avoid renting it to undergraduate students many of these buildings have become dormitories in the neighborhood and maybe some of the other community members can say more about this but this St but the Community Alliance and Bas the overwhelming majority of residents are oppos most of this thank you thank you can you Mr yeah Bruce yes good morning can you hear me now yes hello yes we can hear you sir okay your question well well good morning uh August uh zoning board if there are any questions that you have for me specifically I can speak to the issues well I I think we we' like to understand of the iig you know what transpired and you know was the iig in support or not I mean this is not a like a conversation so if you have testimony you want to provide please provide in the case uh it was as you can see uh from the results that the IG I a was in favor of there was a a bit of concern uh through the community but the ID as a whole was in favor of the Redevelopment of that I saw for a number of years okay thank you any other raised hands yes um I go to Patricia and Julie and then Patricia go ahead we go to Julie yes can you hear me yes thank you thank you good good morning uh honorable members of this and chairwoman appreciate the opportunity to speak we represent my name is Julie Barry we represent uh the butter uh located at 1548 and 155 Tremont Street and 140-142 St alonsus Street we share the concerns raised previously about the change of address but specifically I'm asking uh the board to consider the objections that were raised in our comment letter of April 26 2024 concerning the outsize impact on these two Parcels owned by 1548 LLC they are surrounded basically on three sides by this project and while I heard Mr bicker staff say that it might be good to see this isore undeveloped isore being put into use that doesn't need to be with 95 units everything that's wrong with this project project is based on its uh excessive far and all of the things that flow from that noise privacy light and air my client's properties will be in Shadows pretty much in perpetuity three seasons of the year uh there are issues concerning traffic and congestion not just for vehicle traffic but for pedestrians and the construction management program that's going to need to be in place to avoid uh the total disruption of both residences and businesses during what is obviously going to be a multi-year uh uh project being developed this the the Project's very need for the significant number of variances none of which we can tell that it's actually entitled to a Google Earth search uh aerial version will show that the property is the same shape size soil conditions Etc as the surrounding properties so at the very least we would ask the board to give much further consideration to whether this applicant is entitled to these things and only after providing additional information as to the impacts on the direct and immediate Butters both in terms of light air traffic and noise but also all of the construction issues that are going to flow from this project there's nothing there's a vacant three-story building there right now the addition of 95 units into this neighborhood which very well may end up being uh housing for students as we've heard is going to create a substantial impact on my client and on this neighborhood and so we we asked the board to deny the requested relief they haven't demonstrated they're entitled to it in any way but you know at the very least it needs to be studied much further as to whether it's entitled to the significant zoning relief that's requested and we rely on our comments in detail our letter April 26 thank you for the time I appreciate it thank you Patricia thank you can you hear me now yes yes ma'am thank you my name is Patricia flarity I live at 122 Cali Street in Mission Hill I'm also the executive director of Mission Hill Neighborhood Housing Services Community Development Group working in Mission Hill since 1974 and um I submitted a letter I won't read the entire letter I do want to say a couple of things one is um I note that the bpda representative said that the opposition was related to the developers relationship in the community but I will say that Mission Hill NHS supported um two of this developers previous previous developments on Tremont Street um with those developments we reached um an agreement on design and program that was supportable and then we reached an agreement related to um um undergraduate student housing um in this case we could not reach an agreement related to the design and program um as you can see that there there were some changes made as the bpda representative um pointed out related to the facade on tremon Street however if you look at the project as it goes up Pontiac Street and St Alonso Street we maintain that the project is too high too dense and um truly overshadows the um three families that are on all sides of this development it does not fit into the residential context on this side of tremon street as it is marching up the hill we believe the bpda did a disservice to the neighborhood and while I've worked with um with um some of the folks who testified many times before I have to say that Mission Hill NHS had a representative on the iig the iig never supported this project if you look through the bpda website there is there are hundreds of letters um opposing this project throughout the community process and the bpda determined that they would move on with the project at a density that we feel um does not do a service to the neighborhood and with a program of mostly studios in one bre bedrooms that also will not service the neighborhood or the city in terms of stabilizing um rental housing or stabilizing home ownership which we would like to see in this location um additionally it it is many of the items that were raised by the attorney for the project as benefits are requirements and the the um provision of parking for the Basilica was a requirement related to the um sale of the project it was not a community benefit and um in fact part of the problem with that um requirement is that there's too few parking spaces for the development proposed and the proposal got higher and denser in order to support that um commitment to parking that was required as part of the acquisition Miss FL can you please wrap up we do have other raised hands I'm sorry um so this project is requiring um more than six significant zoning variances there is not mitigation especially at this busy corner at the corner of Tremont and St alons Street um we still don't understand how deliveries and drop offs are actually going to work right at that light and we believe that there are um many um unaddressed negative impacts to this project and we ask your consideration of our concerns thank you Mr Hampton uh thank you madam chair members of board Jeff Hampton bpda uh I just wanted to go a little clarify from Miss uh better barazza about the projects um Community process there were three iag meetings um and there were also three public meetings held um I believe they were all advertised in The Gazette from Mission Hill they were also sent out uh to the subscribers of the uh Mission Hill Neighborhood update list so um I know there were at least six public hearings that were advertised and held three I a three public I just wanted to clarify that a little more for Miss beta barazza I didn't want her to think that uh we didn't have an answer for that's all yeah no problem is it just came it I just wanted to make sure that the residents knew that the hearing was today that and it previously had a different address that's all okay no I just wanted to clarify in case you had any more questions that's all thank you uh Jessica raised hands sure yeah we have three more do you want me to try to get to all three uh let's see what we can get through okay okay go to Patricia he just spoke we okay sorry Sha hi my name is Shiva I'm a resident of mission hell um I just wanted to say like I'm in support of this project I walk by that that unit every single day when I walk home um it is really just an ey store and not to mention it kind of for people who walk by every day it's it's almost Eerie it's just an abandoned empty building in the middle of Mission Hill and a brand new building would honestly bring life and make it more viment to the neighborhood so I'm just here to say that thank you thank you thank you Madame Ambassador mad chair members of the board this is Mina parz representing s and union carpenters and live and work C BOS particular our members live in Mission Hill um it is very important to point out that this project will help to alleviate the Miss of house in the city of Boston as mentioned at the last bpda board meeting many projects that have been approved are not moving forward because of lack of funding uh is a big problem we have AA a lot of projects are not moving forward and it is our belief this Pro is greatly needed thank you I have a nice day okay okay I see one more raised hand let's stop with that the last raise hands James is it James James oh hello can you hear me yes hi yeah uh my name is James I also live um in the neighborhood I actually went to college in the neighborhood uh once I graduated I kind of left for a bit um just only because there was very minimal housing for a lot of us students who do graduate um and I've been actually following this project for a while um I've only been seeing kind of like four bedrooms five bedrooms out in this neighborhood for a bit now um so I was actually very excited I was tried to getting into kind of the other uh properties nearby that were renovated such as I think like uh the traymont um I think there was also one Longwood row uh Valor uh properties even the Longwood um however those projects um the properties were getting rented way too quick um there was no availability um all the other ones that I had options for were more so I would say like very uncared for um the landlords I feel so in the neighborhood don't really um try to improve the properties as much um so when I saw a project like this um kind of people in our industry were looking at it um we're kind of following it we're also trying to see more happening to the neighborhood only because a lot of us are kind of getting a little bit pushed out um just because there is no one-bedroom um housing for just uh a single adult um now compared to finding four or five bedrooms and we kind of don't want to live that college lifestyle so I mean just wanted to say I'm in full support of this project and I think a lot of us are excited for it I think it's going to bring a lot of life to the neighborhood thank you uh Mr Pini do you want to address the question about the deed restriction it sounds like it's been something yeah Madam that's a very important point so um the proponent has had these agreements in place and his other properties as well that there he puts a deed restriction so there's no undergraduate rentals and no undergraduates will live in the property and we are more than happy to have that as a Proviso of this um uh decision we have represented that to the community represent represent that to Patricia flar and her um staff at NH Mission Hill Neighborhood Housing Services so we're we've right from the jump that was out there and continues to this moment thank you is there anything else you'd like to address before we or are there any other questions from the board I have another question regarding to the bpda project manager regarding um article 80 large project riew uh has there been a kind of impact report done in regards to um displacement in the in the area of Mission Hill and whether this actually um exageres that or uh reduces that Trend because you potentially you know when you do have smaller Studio you are kind of catering to um as mentioned non-families so does does the article 80 have that type of um review I know that they do that with Transportation but has that is that in play right now yes yes it it it does we we have uh at the time review housing uh folks that uh work with the with we also worked with the office of mayor's office of housing to to review all that and that information that data was actually uh incorporated into what the projections were for the amount of units that they had so yes we do have a f work internally with that and we make sure we let the proponent know how much what actually do we need to see in terms of um uh and also obviously in terms of a broader area like you know where where displacement is all that stuff we do cover and we actually do add that to the board member as well okay thank you thank you may I have a [Music] motion a motion to approve it with the DED restriction sorry with the provisor for the deed restriction for no undergraduate housing is there a second I'm happy to yeah okay thank you Mr stbridge yes Mr valencio yes Miss B [Music] brazza no Mr Collins yes pado yes fa votes yes the motion carries thank you everybody next we have case bway 154 7315 with the address of 268 274 FR Street this is a cannabis case if the applicant and the represent or the representatives pres explain to the board please may Mr stage hello everyone uh this is Mike Ross attorney for the law for Prince oel I'm here with Matt McKenna from Ascend who's the director of government relations uh regarding what is an existing retail dispensary uh that opened in May of 2021 at this address uh now mam chair I I did prepare a presentation for you you know there's there's no construction at this site this is a use only matter I have some visuals I don't see them up for some reason uh but but you know I just want to let you know that we did prepare and and the board hasn't understood and and and so there basically there's no no work to be done no no interior exterior changes you're just adding you want to add the medical marijuana use correct that's correct there's actually two items Madam chair one is to add medical marijuana use as you mentioned and the second would be to remove a provisor on the original decision that says uh the uh there needs to be a 5-year renewal call uh when this was approved this is one of the first dispensaries the first dispensary I think uh when it was approved for adult use it was very early and I think the board at the time was tentative and said come back to us in 5 years for a renewal so you know since then there's been lots of dispensaries that have opened been no incidents at this particular dispensary and so we would now like to remove that uh dis that uh Proviso going forward so those are the two items thank you thank you questions from the board uh is this for the same applicant Mr Ros yes it is Mr blo yeah it's just to add medical use in order to add medical use just so you know in Massachusetts you actually need to be cultivating as well for this reason there's very few medical operators throughout the city and throughout the state because you also have to grow cultivate somewhere in Massachusetts uh it's just a it's a rule from the CCC it's actually pretty unique to Massachusetts they're thinking about changing it but in the meantime in order to have medical you need to be one of those uh companies that that cultivates as well uh Ascend is one of those companies and they would now like to add the medical use at this facility thank you thank you may we have public testimony Madam chair members of the board Conor new with the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services this time the mayor's is offic to confer to the Judgment of this board oness hosted a community meeting on December 11th uh the appc went on to meet with the West End civic association which offered a letter of non-objection we're unaware of any concerns at this time like refer to the board thank you hello yes uh Lily with counc Jin's office again I'd like to read another statement of support as the District counselor for the b f triangle I'm confident that such an addition to a sence license would be a productive addition to their business having operated here for the past 2 and a half years the business is now familiar with the neighborhood having extensively engaged with the West Pacific Association and has the proper operations and capacity to offer products for medical use as well I ask the board and its members to vote in support of this proposal thank you thank you Jay good morning Madam chair members of the board Jay Walsh on behalf of the downtown North Association uh our board met with the applicant uh in the in their team recently to discuss the addition of medical um marijuana distribution at the site and we have no objections to like to be recorded and support thank you thank you no addition to stand okay well that may I have a motion I make a motion of approval I have a second baras a second Mr stbridge yeah Mr Valencia yes Miss B brazza yes Mr Collins yes M pado yes there votes yes the motion carries good Lu thank you very much have a nice day next we have case v 156 3621 with the address of 198 Maran Street the appc and or their representa pres would they explain to the board please yes good morning Madam chair members of the board Richard Lind with a business address of 245 Summer Street East lost on behalf of the petitioner and the owner of 198 Maran Street I probably jump down to slide three at this time M share relatively uh straightforward proposal we are proposing to change uh the existing use and occupancy of the mixed use building which has ground level retail uh with two residential units above uh we're eliminating that ground level retail and proposing to add that as a residential unit which will become uh the unit for the current owner uh if we want to slide down jump down to the next slide please just a couple of different views of the existing conditions here as you can see it's the building on the right side with the yellow awning the signage for the retail use would be removed next slide please uh just showing our flood uh plane and flood Hazard districts were not located in the flood Hazard District however we were cited for Coastal flood resiliency overlay District as well as gcod this was filed under the prior version of article 53 and therefore C fraud is not applicable to this size project although gcod is we're also CED for IOD which expired in November of 2023 next slide please jump on next slide please uh so our site plan here shows the existing building we're not proposing any change uh with respect to the footprint of the building or the height of the building as a result in in light of the recent zoning amendments that were adopted by the zoning commission last week uh this project would be in compliance with the new uh provisions of article 53 and specific specifically uh the new subdistrict which would be EV3 uh within the EV3 a three family residential use is allowed although we were cited for insufficient usable open space which typically would have been a item that would have been triggered as a result of adding residential units uh that requirement is eliminated under the amended article 53 uh and therefore this would be a legally pre-existing non-conforming structure uh any of the new dimensional controls including uh maximum lock coverage and minimum permeable area would we would be exempt from since this is not necessarily uh project that we're adding any additional square footage there are Provisions in the new amended article 53 that allow for these existing uses to continue and certainly the change of use to a conforming use would uh would be appropriate next slide please uh see our floor plans here uh we're not proposing any habitable space uh in the open basement area that will continue to be operated for utilities storage Etc the main work that is being proposed is on that first level which is the prior retail location uh if we could just zoom out a little bit probably a little bit better um and that would be as I mentioned the owner's unit uh that owns the building uh next slide please as you can see on our elevations again we're not changing anything with respect to the height of the building uh or or the existing footprint that exists today uh simply containing all of the work within uh the inside of the unit um so with respect to the other items we were cited for uh normally when you change occupancy from a mixed use to all residential uh the former version of article 53 would have required additional parking uh under the new amending article 53 however uh parking for up to three units it's uh there's no requirement so we will be in compliance with that as well I believe the bpda did recommend approval for this and I will pause there and answer any questions of the board thank you uh any questions from the board hearing none may have public testimony good morning Madam chair members of the board melas with the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services on hosted an ab's meeting for this project on September 13th of 2023 two abutters were present on the call both AB buts agreed that a parking variance was preferable given the proximity to the nearby School the proponent met with the Maverick Central neighborhood association and the group voted to support the project at this time our office would like to defer judgment to the board thank you the best from councelor K's office the councelor will liable and support the project thank you I see no additional raise hands thank you that may I have a motion Madam chair I like to put for a motion of approval with the PDA design review paying special attention to address resiliency given that is prone to Coastal coastal flooding he I'm sorry M just there were no there was no exterior work being proposed so I don't I'm just curious if the bpda design rview is applicable I just I wasn't I Mr Hampton do you want to weigh in on that one uh short matter chair yeah if there's no exterior work I don't want it okay output for a motion of approval is there a second second Mr stbridge yes Mr valencio yes Mr brazza yes Mr Collins yes Miss pado yes chair also votes yes motion carries thank you very much next we have case boa 56 3720 with the address of 200 ever Street with the applicant and the representative explain to the board please yes good morning again Madam chair members of the board Richard lind's business address of 245 Summer Street East Bost on behalf of the petitioner Ali Abdullah and Julia Daniels uh they are the owners of the property at 200 ever Street we can scroll right down to uh slide 11 I think would be helpful slide 11 he said 11 pleas yes thank you perfect um so Madam chair members of the board this is a pre-existing single family dwelling located at Jeff point section of East Boston uh is a corner lock condition located the corner of Everett and paramont Street our proposal would change the use and occupancy of the building from a one family to a three family uh would add a vertical addition to the building uh as well as uh perform a number of safety and life upgrades that would be required by the building code um this is also and I'll try to be more brief about my zoning explanations but because of the new zoning recently adopted this to would be in the EV3 District a three family dwelling is permitted um within the district uh up to 35 ft in height which is what we're proposing uh as I mentioned in the past presentation there is no parking requirement uh we originally did uh intend to include op parking of the rear of the property however uh based upon an understanding and a commitment we made to the directive but to our left we've eliminated the parking from the site and that is still a complying condition under current zoning uh in addition uh we reduced our proposed rear deck that was originally as part of this project uh to allow for more access light air for the director butter and that director butter has requested that we've also provide them uh with easement rights over our property to access their rear yard out to arone Street which we've agreed to do in connection with the modifications of this project um if we want to jump down to the next slide I can show the existing site plan so as you can see as I mentioned this corner lock condition shows the building uh pretty much going lot line to lot line to the sides and a relatively short back in the rear of the property which is a condition that's pretty typical in this section of East Boston there is a rear deck off the back of the building uh we are proposing to stay within the envelope of our building as well as the uh rear deck again based upon our conversations with the um direct of butter if we want to jump down to slide 19 please uh so we can see here uh for our proposed uh ground level which as a full walkout condition to the rear of the property as well as the uh upper level which would be part of the first unit uh we do uh maintain uh again the existing footprint of the building as well as the uh rear deck uh condition is something that we've committed to with the direct butter next door next slide please uh as you can see here with our um second and third levels uh we are proposing a one and a two better unit uh and then we do propose a roof deck that will be exclusive to the oper level uh unit only next slide please uh from an elevation standpoint we're showing the right side of our building uh as well as the front uh as part of the architectural features for the addition we do propose bump outs that are consistent with the di Minimus projection policy for the city of Boston which allows us uh to create that architectural feature above the first level within 24 in of the building itself so we don't extend out further than 24 in uh it does provide additional space for those units as well as a feature that is pretty consistent with a number of the projects have been completed along average Street next slide please see the our rear elevation as well as our right side elevation which shows it in relationship to the butter to our our left again you can see the rear decks as well the access up to uh the roof deck um with respect to the relief not unlike the last project that we just presented uh this was filed for the amendments to article 53 when it's to effect um because we were cited for um matters such as rear yard and sidey yard because of the proposed addition uh those violations would be eliminated under new zoning since the amended article 53 permits uh vertical additions that stay within the foot the M uh to be allowed uh as a matter of right provided they don't exacerbate any of the setbacks that are currently uh nonconforming under the uh existing conditions on addition uh we were cited for uh usable open space uh usable open space would be a requirement old arle 53 where you're adding additional units You' be required to add open space for each unit again because this would be a legally pre-existing footprint uh our building lock coverage and permeability would not be affected since we would be a pre-existing condition however by uh making the modifications that we propos we are actually adding permeability uh so that rear portion which is paved over currently uh will be uh created to be part of a permeable surface um and with respect to the 4at ratio uh the current condition would be non-conforming under the prior version of article 53 there is no flid area ratio maximum any longer under the osed article 53 or the newly enacted article 53 and therefore we would comply with that as well uh we also cited for gcod which we do have the compliance others that we included uh and iPod which expired in November of 2023 I will pause there and answering the questions of the board thank you um can you confirm the easement that you discussed uh several of your Butters uh weigh in on that not just 198 what's the easement cover like which which go back we can go back to slide 13 does it cover 192 to 198 no it only covers our a butter to our left okay so 198 198 correct okay other questions from the board um if if uh Jeff Hampton can just speak on um access to the roof deck from an exterior uh stair versus interior to the unit uh that actually wasn't a concern of us miss Hans yeah so so that's what so is um are are you okay with having exterior roof access um you know moving forward on projects I know that it's preferable to have interior access to the roofs just to kind of mitigate um noise from the exterior and um and also to to create you know not kind of an open access from the ground to the roof just for security measures as well well I can't say about projects going forward I know in the past we have uh approved access to uh roof decks from spiral staircases um but it it's something now that you bring it up I can look into with staff here yeah I mean the there's a regardless that's recommended to review the roof deck but I'll I'll just add that as well and it'll be great to kind of get your stance on it yeah I know for each Boston is critical so yeah I mean we're not opposed to the roof deck um but I think it was just you know the setbacks from the roof Edge that was a concern for us and you know that that's what we want to take a look at but honestly the stairs weren't an issue for us okay that sounds good thank you thank you thank you madam chair if I could just add one one brief item so I I do do um and I appreciate Miss bz's comments we we do note that this these are two balconies at the lower levels there is no access up to the roof from the ground um so we do we do appreciate that that's one of the reasons why we were proposing this uh in other instances we do agree that where the stairs come all the way down the ground uh it does you know present somewhat of a security issue and we would not want that either so we we fully understand that thank you uh was that may have public testimony good morning Madam chair members of the board Mel viz with the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services on hosted an a Butters meeting for this project on January 4th of 2024 two Butters were present on the call Lo director butter sh strong concerns about access to the back of his property being restricted due to the project uh the back of his property is his emergency exit and his second eress and the proponent met with the jeffre point neighborhood association the group voted in February to oppose the project the vote was four in support nine in opposition and one abstaining based on an email sent to O Yesterday by attorney Lind it seems that the ab Butter's concerns were addressed and his opposition was withdrawn though our office has not received a letter from this abutter at our time at this time our office would like to defer judgment to the board thank you thank you um okay do just say a raised hand Brian are you looking to get testimony here just no I just wanted to follow up on we did come to an agreement I just want to make sure that this there's a provisio or something in this um confirming that easement in the back that that we had discussed so I'm the director butter next door can you st your name and full address Brian Ganon 198 Everett Street thank you have no additional re Madam chair just briefly I I'm not I know the past practice of the board has not has been not to include uh private Arrangements including easements um the easement is not required for the project that is a private agreement between the parties and not something that I think the zoning board is in the business of policing we've made the commitment I've made the commitment on the record I have communications with the a we will honor that commitment based upon the terms that we provided to that a thank you will that may I have a [Music] motion Madam chair like go ahead David you go ahead and put the motion I'm motion approve with ppda design you I have a second Rise a second Mr stbridge yeah Mr Valencia yes m b brazza yes Mr Collins yes Miss pado yes chair also votes yes the motion carries uh let's take a five minute break which will bring us just after 11 thank you recording stopped for e e e e e e e e e e e e e e Valencia pres m b Braza presid Mr Collins presid Miss pado present all right the floor is yours Mr stbridge thank you madam chair uh we'll begin with the hearing uh scheduled for 11:00 a.m. first we have case boa want to ask about the ferals withdrawals first uh good good point mam chair um if we ask if there are any requests for withdrawals or referrals from the 11:00 conf frence hearing no request [Music] you we will go into to case boa 15720 59 with the address of 72 High Park Avenue uh prior um will ask if there there's an interpreter assign to the to this case is that person present with us yes this is the V is interpreter great can sorry before you proceed can I also just remind uh applicants that this is a six member board sorry please proceed um and with that uh we'll ask if the uh in addition to the applicant if the uh owner the rep the representative and the applicant is pro hi Mr stbridge uh he is this is Mike Ross I Am uh attorney with the law from of princic B joined today with co-counsel uh Derek small uh who initially worked on this project along with David Troy the architect I think we have a good news story here for the board um the applicant appeared in front of the board in 2022 under an ER permit with board Mr Ross sorry we do have an interpreter so a I'll ask you pause and B I'll ask you to spell out ER for that person so that she knows how to translate it um the translator would you like to begin Miss wi yes [Music] for Mr thank you sorry about that we were we were here on an ER in 2022 it was approved uh by the board uh and the approvals had to do with off street parking F lot width Building height and sidey yard setback [Music] [Music] afterward the applicant you know during construct preparing for construction the applicant ran into an issue with a large tree in the back of the building you might have read about it um where it appeared impossible to save the [Music] [Music] tree the applicant agreed to work with the mayor's office the counselor's office the bpda uh in order to change the project which is why we're here [Music] today essentially what the applicant want up doing is taking the rear portion of the building and I'll show you in a second uh and and taking that portion and putting it on the top of the building um and I can I can show you that [Music] second at man bassador sides two and three show a comparison of um a little hard to see but it's really just to give you like a sense there um of the before and after left is the 2022 plan on the right is the is today's plan that's in front of you today and slide three another Vantage as well um 2022 on the left an approved project 2023 what we're closing today you go to all the way M Ambassador oh sorry go ahead Madam interpreter [Music] uh M Pastor if you go to slide 10 A1 it's the site plan uh it's several slides down this will show you kind of the next yeah uh that's that's great um so as you can see from this slide here um the rear uh yard setback uh in this district is required to be 20 what we now have is is really twice at 39 feet 9 in previously it was 28 uh Feet 3 in so we moved it approximately 11 and 1/2 ft and if you see that little Dash red line along the back that's where it was and now you see there where it is [Music] so if you go to the next slide this is we'll just walk you through the floor plans of the building now this is the basement It's All Storage that's what it was previously you you will see ramps on the side of the building on the right side I'll show you that on the next slide [Music] the next slide uh is the floor plan for what we're calling the first floor um you know there's a substantial slope from the front of the building to the back of the building and that ramp is what brings you really up an entire floor from the front that's on follows the right side of the building or the bottom of your screen uh that allows the uh unit unit two to be an accessible fully accessible unit fore [Music] [Music] and what we have here is unit one and unit two uh unit one is they're both they're all three bedroomroom two baths all six units in this project uh unit one here on the left or on the top of your screen is is a 1,161 square ft and unit 2 is 1,143 ft [Music] [Music] and the next slide will'll show you units three and four uh unit 3 is 1172 unit 4 is 1183 also a three too [Music] B and the next unit these last four units I showed you were really substantially similar it's really this is the unit that changed a little bit we created a duplex of these units so unit five and unit six are now duplex with that little half story that's above them uh so in total you're looking at a 1618 for unit 5 and 1623 for unit six [Music] [Music] and the and the last FL plan slide that will show you that half story um calling it a mezzanine level here you go that's right Mass has a little front area as well set back from the street uh that's the that's essentially the additional space that was locked off the the back of the [Music] we just going to run through the zoning relief Madam chair so um we were cited for additional lot area uh really in article 55 35000 this type of building uh doesn't have an additional L area requirement but we were cited for [Music] that and then um we were cited for f again uh like previously so you know I'm not sure we needed to uh however the f is exactly the same actually it's 1.42 it was 1.42 in 2022 it's now 1.42 [Music] today we were seted for use for the six units in a three out 5,000 we were again cited for stories for height but this time we were also cited for feet for height uh which is uh absolutely warranted we're now at 516 as measured from the sidewalk out front closer to 40 uh as measured from the rear and then finally we were cited for open space uh 35000 requires 150 per unit we are well over that we're close to 2,000 uh we're supposed to have 900 so and we got cited for it but we we didn't need we didn't need to be cited for [Music] that uh mam chair I'll pause there and see if there are any questions thank you any questions from the board um I you mentioned that um you were creating an accessible ramp on the side is to bring accessibility to which unit um thank you Miss bza if you go to slide um to the floor plan Ambassador slide one I mean um you'll see it it's to create access to unit two um theoretically however miss you could do uh you could make access to both unit 2 and unit one you can see there how the rear it brings you to the rear of the building there up up the side that that much slope is really needed in order to get that ramp all the way up there um so once you enter the rear of the building you really could go in either direction but um but unit two the one that's on the lower half of the screen there was specifically designed with the turning radiuses in mind as you can see uh by the small turning radius at the door however these units are substantially similar almost the same so really you could you could get access to both units one and unit two and that um deck as you can see on unit one can you pause to let the interpretor Speak oh I'm I'm sorry uh yeah [Music] [Music] deck on the I mean the U the unit above unit one with the deck there that deck ultimately travels to the rear of the building as well and connects to the ground at the rear of the building too so but theoretically you could have you have access from the front to the two units and you can go all the way to the back door to have access to the patio you don't necessarily need accessibility kind of uh access to the sides you you could have access to the P from the inside your unit you mean for unit one uh I think yeah you can yeah you can have it for both right oh I see what you're saying I see what you're saying well uh this will allow you to to gain access you just have to have a t potentially Garden at the rear you would have to grade the rear to some extent uh if you were to have just outdoor access understood yeah I mean perhaps yeah I'm just making note that you you just have you know your building is already maximizing itself in the properly line and then you're just using the two kind of open space of the s is to just do um uh ramping um structures understood um um I do think that ramp on the on the bottom is is required we had a ramp initially um in 2022 I I think you could probably get away with without the deck on that other side we're happy to look at that in the bpda design review process if this should pass today okay let's and then I'm sorry the the other thing can we Let The Interpreter speak can you guys please pause [Music] [Music] thanks [Music] for okay any other questions from the board let's open it up to public testimony I was going to say we have a Vietnamese interpreter so I assume we have someone who needs it maybe they could go first [Music] [Music] [Music] Madam chair in the meantime if I make go um Conor Newman with the mayor's office and Neighborhood Services this time the mayor's off defer to the Judgment this board uh previously the applicant received support from the jamaic plane neighborhood Council in August of 2022 in 2023 concerns about the preservation of a mature Tree on the property emerged uh the applicant has worked with the BPA to alter designs to save the tree for the past few months after a month of design review the applicant submitted plans that preserve the tree and maintains the unit count [Music] [Music] for the is now comfortable with the design as it maintains accessibility and preserves the tree at this time the mayor's office does not have any other questions or concerns we defer to the board thank you [Music] good afternoon Madam chair members of the board Jordan Fus here from councelor Benjamin we's office district 6 uh we a we heard a lot about this since the previous fall and as we understanded the developer has hired someone to oversee U maintaining the tree at 72 High Park [Music] a for uh they'll be making sure that the tree stays healthy and well and has received we have received assurances that maintaining the health and wellbeing of the tree is priority for them [Music] because of this consideration we're in full support of this proposal and the councilor wants to go to record and support thank [Music] [Music] you thank you um I go to Karina and then Faith yes go I may encourage folks to also put your comments in the record to help move this forward it seems to be a lot of raised hands or comments in the chat okay can you hear me I am C Scali of 48 well Hill Street just around the corner from the project I can see the tree from my house and one of the the neighbors who uh organized to try and keep the developers a commitment to preserving the tree I'm really happy with the new project it's great that we get to keep the tree and the housing and I want to know the name of the arborist and what measures will be taken to preserve the Twee during [Music] construction [Music] [Music] for okay fa oh yeah hi can you hear me yeah okay yeah I live across uh on uh wam Street I across from Ken Pope whose backyard uh overlooks the lot and I just want to say yes I am really happy that we are going to preserve the tree because we need it you know the tree canopy for um you know clean air and for uh heat control in the summer and um I also want to point out obviously uh that if that tree would be removed the whole Hillside would collapse and it would collapse right into you know the 72 H Park a property so this is you know um also a really practical consideration but um but mostly you know I just want to say that you know the neighbors also the new neighbors at sing to high PR G will also be able to enjoy the same um you know cooling effects that we the neighbors want thank [Music] you [Music] [Music] for [Music] for so I'm going to ask to pause here because I think all seems to me that most of the feedback is positive if there's anyone who's not in support if you're in support can you put your hands down and if you're not in support can you raise your hand so we can make sure we hear from both sides [Music] [Music] for and in the meantime can uh can uh okay thank you thank you uh for putting the AR info uh so Jessica any raised hands in opposition yeah Matthew no I'm I'm sorry I was in support awesome so I I'm just trying to help move us along because I can tell from the chat that there's a lot of support and so I just thank you for expressing that uh so I I'm going to ask if there are any other questions from the [Music] board hearing none can I have a motion Madam chair I'd like to put forward a motion of approval with a provid that the plans be reviewed by bpda to ensure that tree roots are protected from all sight excavation and another um uh special attention to the site planning the landscaping and the first uh ground floor to work with the context typology that you see of the ground floor is there a second second Mr stbridge yes Mr Valencia yes Miss better brazza yes Mr Collins yes Miss panado yes the chair also votes yes the motion carries so I would uh encourage the applicant to to revisit speaking with your neighbors who have additional questions about you know the arus that so please do that thank you madam chair thank you [Music] members okay thank you so next case and I don't think we need a translator for that one but uh so yes please proceed the next two are companion cases first being case boa 156 2423 with the address of 12 Murray Hill Road along with that we have case boa 156 2421 with the address of 12r muray Hill R if the applicant and representative Pres they explain the case for the board hi um let see Linda is that you let me I sent a request to unmute you I'm un unmuted thank you this is Linda okay are you on for this will you be speaking for this proposal um we thought Beth war was is she on okay not sure but are you with her or you you yeah she's our Architect no she's not with us I'm G make you a panelist okay not sure yes thank you MH hey I was about to call you interesting that I didn't realize that it was so yeah it was non a lot for answering the questions except for the board's question and very much like approve Jessica can you please mute yeah I guess just and Beth once you're a panelist you can unmute yourself okay um sorry about that can everybody hear me yes we can okay all right um so this is um a small existing home in Rosendale uh right off of Washington Street on um Murray Hill and uh our proposal in involves both the existing house and the um existing garage which has now been demolished um we had a separate permit for the demolition of the garage the violations primarily stem from the fact that uh the um the house is located on a existing non-conforming lot that's 4,000 sare ft and 40 ft wide inad instead of 5,000 ft and 50 ft wide um we're proposing a modest family room Edition that aligns with the right side of the existing house um which is already uh side yard is less than required um and the required rear yard is um 40 ft and with the addition we're uh at 37 ft one of the most noticeable changes probably that we will be making is um we'll be removing all of the vinyl siding and restoring the exterior to its original um wood shingles and uh replacing all of the trim that was removed when the vinyl siding was was put on um looking at the back here the the the rear porch will be demolished and uh the addition would be on the left um approximately uh from the left side of the house there to where that porch is um and there will be a small new deck and there so this shows the existing Gage G which is no longer there and you can see the side yard setback for the existing garage is only 2 ft and part of the reason is probably the fact that uh the driveway is only 8 ft wide it's extremely difficult to get back there so for the proposed garage which is the 12r part of the project uh we are requesting um to build the new garage the 2 ft off the uh retaining wall that you can see there which is part of 10 Murray Hill um the the adjacent property on the left um that's the only violation for the garage the the rear yard required setback is 4T and the um we will be meeting that requirement the thank you Beth let me ask if there are questions from the board okay hearing none let's have public testimony yes Madam chair members of the board Conor Newman with the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services this time the mayor offic defer to the Judgment of this board uh on had the applican circulative flyer to a Butters within 300 ft U presly run aware of any concerns without refer to the board thank you [Music] okay Mr Cruz good morning Madam chair members of the board this is Gabriel Cruz from councelor Pen's office the council will let go on record that he is in support of this project thank you thank you I have no additional Voice May I have a motion motion of approval may I have a second second Mr stbridge yeah Mr Valencia yes is better brazzo yes Mr Collins yes Miss pado yes chair votes yes motion carries thank you next next we have case boa 52 357 with the address of 35-35 B old Morton Street with the applicant and their repres and the representatives present will they explain Bo pleas one second have a raised hand Roland you the [Music] speak Roland is here as particip as an attendee uh can you please allow them to be as participants so that they can uh talk about the case yes is it for this case yes okay perfect yeah um R I just sent a request to make you a panelist oh great thank you so much y he has to press accept um and that will unmute him I also tried to unmute him from my side okay there we go all right so once you become immunity go ahead Cleon um same thing for you thank you R can you hear us yes yes great I I just got in um also with me is uh Co counsel uh attorney TR he also would like to be admitted if possible y that's no problem I'll take care of that you said Tony TR is he on under that name in the meantime you want to get started but is he can you raise your your hand if you need to be elevated to a panelist for this proposal I don't see the name who is presenting this case is it Mr fam or is it someone else Roland fam is the one that's going to represent okay so Mr fam are you ready to present as we identify the other person or ran can you please go forward Roland panelist you're on mute Mr [Music] fam start video okay hi uh everybody I'm in right yes you are hi this is what I'm just confirming that I am in as a panelist am I am I not okay who is presenting for this case can you please Jesus if Mr fam are you prepared to present for this case or or who is presenting Mr can you please go ahead and present case oh okay can you hear can hear me okay we can hear you Mr TR too but I think you cannot hear us and we need you to proceed okay all right first of all thank you for allowing us to participate in this uh hearing today uh my name is qu Tran I'm one of the attorney on record uh representing this uh property at 35b 35b 35 uh old Boton Street with me is my co counsel Roland Farm who is going to uh provide you with information regarding uh the progress of our you know of our process also with me is Susan wi who is the U manager of of the project manager for the property and and uh ala Alba uh who is from the uh architect office who here today to ensure that all technical questions will be um answered by her um so without further Ado I'm going to allow Mr Farm to to proceed with with information thank you thank you [Music] um good morning we're here to uh to seek a variance for for um the probity at 35 or uh the last time that we we did the presentations was with the uh neighborhood service uh the the neighborhood Civic associations um all of whom uh have not object to the plan the proposed plans um now we we returning uh before the board for uh the approval the final approval to go forward essentially this um this property that we are looking to build on is a property that used to have a three family structure on it uh it was burned down uh and now we would like to build also a three family uh is um it's a townhouse style as you can see there um and we met with uh a couple neighborhood Civic associations to um to show that the proposed plan um and U everyone was excited that this um lot is to be improve uh because it was it it was um it looks a mess after the fire um they uh it trash was accumulated there um and uh it overgrowth uh was beginning to take over but uh we are looking to build a uh three family townhouse uh on this slot improving the uh the look of the neighborhood the value of the neighborhood you see the uh the design the faure of the building uh and we point this out to the neighborhoods that um in designing this building we incorporate the uh the Char characteristics of the uh neighborhood so this building actually looks uh uh actually it is fits very well in the neighborhood it does not stand out um it looks just like any other building that's existing on that street and the neighbors were very excited although a few uh gave us a few suggestions to consider and uh we have considered those suggestions and incorporate those suggestion into our final plan uh which is presented before you as much as possible um the uh B suggestion has been Incorporated and um here we are if you have any um technical questions I'll leave it uh I refer to uh to um the architect and so I'm open for question questions from the board yes I have a question yes please what did what did the bpda tell you or the BOS and transportation department told you about the parking because what I can see here on the screen is that any anyone has any questions any things to present now as far as the um arkins spaces as you can see there uh as as I said there used to be a three family structure there now it's also a three family with uh enough parking space uh for everyone that's located in the back of the building yes thank you my concern is not about how many parking spaces you have my concern is about the project covering the entire open space with parking with asphalt do you have any conversations with the bpda about reducing the parking spaces the parking numbers is does anyone have any question or concern regarding this project that I that I may answer Mr fam our Our zba member Mr Valencia asked you about the parking sorry I canot hear you for some reason okay well I either Suzanne or or Mr TR because we need to keep moving forward uh there are questions about the number of parking spaces uh and the reduction of open space to accommodate that can the applicant address that yes I can address that um we thank you um we hope to have the parkings there so that um we don't have to use the uh parking from the street overcrowding the uh neighborhood so so that was the reason why we try to incorporate the parking so that uh it doesn't um take over a lot of spaces from the street so that a lot of the neighbors can use the parking from the street um instead of uh the uh occupants that are going to live in the three family home taking uh spaces from the street so that was the reason why we tried to incorporate those parking areas uh not to all over by the street park thank you can can one of you also answer uh previously you said there was a burnt house it was a three family that that that uh experienced the fire so how many parking spaces were there previously when it was a three family if I may uh J uh the number of proposed parking space here on this plan was more than what it used to be um and in fact we point this out to the neighborhood uh during the neighborhood uh meeting uh a few you rais concern because during the construction uh period or the bations um construction uh vehicle was some of them parked temporarily on the street um and that was brought up at the uh at the hearing with the neighborhood we point out that though they they temporarily just come and go um but after the construction all these parkings uh for the uh for the occupant would be site as you can see there and um the number of parking spaces there there are seven uh proposed and this number was more than what it used to be before the fire okay thank you other questions from the board let me open it up to public testimony good morning uh sorry hello Madam chair members of the board Eric James for the uh mayor's office of Neighborhood Services the applicant for 35b old Morton Street held their but meeting on December 7th they also met with the River Street civic association uh where they received the following recommendations so the board provided several recommendations to the new and family and their team emphasizing the importance of integrating the new town homes harmoniously with the existing streetcape specifically the board suggested orienting the Town Homes at a 90° angle and aligning the front doors with the old Morton Street wall it was also recommended that the architectural design be in keeping with the style of the surrounding homes with a maximum height of 2 and 1 half stories and the inclusion of Dormers where appropriate Additionally the board expressed the community desire to preserve the maple tree and Stone Wall located on the lot line of 31 Old Morton Street as well as ensuring an adequate setback on the north side of the property furthermore it was emphasized that maintaining a clean construction site and facilitating communication with neighboring residents throughout the project duration are essential for fostering positive community relations and they reiterate that their willingness to support the project um comes once the uh these considerations have been addressed so we at this time the mayor's office would like to defer our judgement to the board on this matter thank you thank you good morning Madam chair members of the board my name is I am do weo city council Bri warell And in regards to the project as um on representative just stated with the letters from R Street Association um I know this isn't the usual case but I know that the proponent who mentioned that they took in mind some of the considerations I just want to confirm if River Street's letter and all the sort of concerns that they had stated was part of those considerations that they considered our support is sort contingent upon that okay I'm sorry I'm sorry I didn't hear uh the the um the questions what was uh asked Mr fam can you clarify what considerations from the neighborhood groups you took into that you how did you modify the project to take Community feedback into consideration that is the question well essentially the um um the major consider the major uh um uh recommendations that the building has to be turned uh 90° so uh so that the uh build the the front doors would be uh to the side we cons we discussed that with the architect that doesn't make sense uh it could not be done uh if we would keep uh the the parking space in the back um and as far as the uh the facial of the uh the structure we have Incorporated that in uh into the building uh the building now looks uh as I said previously um very much similar to all other structure on the street and as for the preservation of the oak tree in the back yes we will We we'll keep that uh as long as it does not interfere we try not to have that oak tree interfere with the constructions um we don't see the reason why we should need to cut it down so um that would definitely be the case office like offer support okay thank you any other raised hands any other questions I'm sorry go ahead hello hello uh can you hear me gar found offic yes yes I can hear you please proceed yes yes yes I I I was at the uh both River Street and the LA can you identify yourself and your your address please for the record yes Gary to 17 Temple Street um Matan I uh I was at both hearings Le but's meeting and uh this both civic association meeting hearings and one of the points that we made at these hearings is is that the overall majority of the houses on Old Morton Street which is a very old Street early 1800s uh most of the houses built by the Walter Baker Chocolate Factory those houses architecturally always had majority had the Gable in facing the street if you look at the photo was part of the application submitt to the board um you'll see that the existing house had a Gable end facing the street the narrow wall was at the street the long wall went down into the property there were three parking spaces on the south side of the driveway and and there was a two-car garage in back what that allowed was to have a decent backyard in the back of the building and it allowed the the north wall of the building to be far enough away from the abing property which is 31 Old Street um there is a a Fieldstone wall an old historic wall that's part of 31 Old Morton Street that needs to be preserved the house is too close to the lot line at 31 Old Mor it's only like 3 ft away uh also the tree that we're talking about is on the property 31 Old Maron street it's not on the property of 35 Old Maron Street and so we want to make sure that that's preserved and recognized but architecturally these are old houses they're three Windows wide they have front porches they have the front door facing the street you know what we were asking is is that they locate the house pretty much where the old house was which is a very successful placement on the lot and it allowed the majority of the windows to face South and it allowed the parking to be on the South Side uh and allowed for a decent very nice backyard in the back of the of the house Our concern is without a backyard and all this Paving it's not going to be a uh a very pleasant place to to live so those are our concerns and appreciate the board considering that thank you any other raised hands no just raised hands any other questions from the board I mean I share uh Mr Valencia's concern about the number of parking spaces the paving the lack of open space and permeable space I think seven spaces for three uh family home is excessive um so I um I guess I would ask the applicant to consider one space per unit well I guess I I I will suggest that if someone wants to make a motion with such a provisor you're more than welcome to do so uh are there other questions okay may I have a well fine so I'm happy to make a motion uh for approval with the Proviso that the applicant um work with the bpda and design review with attention to reduction of the um off street parking spaces from 7 to 3 um and increasing the permeable space on the lot is there a second second Mr strid yeah I'm yes okay thank you Mr Valencia yes m b brazza yes Mr Collins yes n yes chair votes yes the motion carries thank you everyone um before we continue uh we're in almost at noon time we'll ask if there are any withdrawals of referrals from the 11:30 time time frame if there our no withdrawals from the 11:30 time frame then we will Mad sorry is it possible this is Eric zon the architect for 146 M Street I'd like to request a deferral for a family matter that the client wasn't able to make it today sorry which case is it 146 M Street okay second to last one though Mr s can you please [Music] mute can you please M others in Mr strid 146 [Music] so that would be for K bo8 134 101015 with the address of 146 M Street um would you do you have a reason for [Music] the uh the client had a family emergency this morning and and can't make it today so he had asked me to step on and and ask for a deferral thank you um the next available date would be for June 4th that would be great thank you okay um motion to defer second second okay Mr stbridge yes Mr Valencia yes Miss B brazza yes Mr Collins yes Miss pado yes chair votes yes motion carries thank you very much so if there are no more request for all to betr from 11:30 we will move back to the 11:00 hearings to case boa 156 443 oh um I apologized uh the case we should be on is case boa 152 8988 the address of 3510 Washington Street if the applicant and though the representative presid they explain for it yes uh good morning uh my name is Timothy Burke I'm the architect for the project I have a business address of 142 Berkeley Street in Boston and with me is the owner of the property Bill gal the uh project is um right on Washington Street the uh there's an existing row of four properties these are all individually um individual properties and so um we are proposing to add a two stories above the existing restaurant space at the grade level and it would provide two uh partments that would be a two bedroom two bath apartments one is 1310 Square ft and the other is 1,250 Square ft there is parking at the rear of this structure for this building and um we um previously had received approval for the one two doors down at 3514 which is currently under construction and um the uh you're seeing here the elevation from Washington Street the next uh drawing shows the plot plan if we could go to the next uh slide please yep Y and that shows the um now the four properties are all connected together here the next slide shows the existing plan which is the U restaurant plan it has a full basement and a first story and then the uh next drawings show the proposed four plans which have the two apartments so these are duplex units one in the back and one in the front Within an internal stairway there is no uh roof deck proposed for this project and then the uh the next drawing shows the elevations of The Proposal as I mentioned the one on the right is the one that's under construction now and the one on the left is the one that we're um presenting to you today I'm um also talking to the people on the left of that to uh hopefully pursue a similar addition eventually fill in the whole block there so I'd be um happy to answer any questions that you may have thank you yeah well you answered one of my questions about filling in those gaps uh any other questions from the board can you talk about the parking yes the parking is located at the rear of the building there is a driveway on the left hand side the north side of the property that takes you around behind the buildings and that's where parking is for each of these properties how much parking are you proposed there are two spots in the back that are dedicated to this property each each property has two spots okay thank you other questions from the board here none can have public testimony yes Madam chair members of the board Conor Newman with the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services this time the mayor's office to refer to the Judgment of board uh due to Personnel changes I don't have a lot of information regarding the community process for this proposal how we do know that the jamaic plan neighborhood Council uh recommended uh supporting this uh proposal run aware of any specific concerns at this time thank you thank you you have a stand here mayor you uh chair uh members of the board this is om heack at 3514 Washington Street uh just uh one door down uh from this project and uh I'd like to go on record and support of this project uh I think uh we have great communication uh on behalf between all the neighbors and I think this is a great project thank you that may I have a motion a motion to approve of bbda design review have a second second Mr stbridge yes Mr Valencia yes Miss bza yes Mr Collins yes Miss pado yes chair votes yes motion carries thank you very much nice that was it next we have case vaa 155 2647 with the address of 608 Shaman Avenue if the applicant and or the representative is present would they explain the case for yes I am uh my name is haki Pratt I am the architect the project representing the owner and Al Cory what we propose is changing the existing areny from a three family from three families and uh apartments and store to three uh three apartments and a barers shop the work proposed is minor we are proposing only in chior work which is a wall in a door uh and most importantly uh five barbecue I'm sorry barber chairs and a hair wash sink uh the owner bought the property back in [Music] 2021 uh at the time it still is it's uh occupied by three uh three bedroom units on the upper floors and of course the lower level street level which is commercially used is currently vacant uh has remained bacon until the owner found a lease uh e that he thought was either appropriate uh for the uh location or the uh use that was appropriate for the location also for the size in which he has found uh a a leisi uh which is of course a Barby shop this Bobby shop is going to be operated by a uh husband and and wife uh combination again uh no internal uh uh only interior uh uh changes improvements are proposed uh and most importantly also no exterior changes are proposed for the exterior of the uh uh of the building uh minor there only one violation that is the barber shop is a conditional use in a multif family residential district thank you any questions from the board hearing none may have a public testimony yes madam chair members of the board callor Newman with the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services this time the mayor's off defer to the Judgment of this board some back information the community process ons hosting at Butters meeting February 5th uh some immediate of Butters expressed some concerns uh that this business might add to existing issues in the community with with drug dealing and and gun violence uh the applicants explained that they would be potentially doing just appointment only uh for for Barber for haircuts um and that uh that type of behavior wouldn't be tolerated and that um they wouldn't have control over what happened outside in the broader Community it didn't think that they'd be much of an impact on this um I don't believe we have any letters from support or opposition uh with that will defer to the board thank you thank you any other raised hands with that may I have a motion motion to approve have a second St Mr stbridge yes Mr Valencia yes M bza yes Mr Collins yes Miss pado yes chair votes yes motion carries thank you very much next we have case boa 151 7916 with the address of 9906 East 4th Street if the applic and board representative is present would they explain to the board please uh good good afternoon Madam chairman members of the board my name is Francis Adams I'm an attorney in Boston business address at 350 West Broadway in South Boston also on the uh presentation is Ben lesle Ben is the project architect and is also the owner of the property that is uh proposal in front of the board today um very briefly um members of the board it say existing three unit condominium it's a twole condominium at the front and one level in the rear um the Mr Lal and his family are proposing a rare addition to the back of the property to make the property line and the height consistent with the rest of the neighborhood um there were five uh violations that we seeking relief for um roof roof structure reject U on the lower roof um reconfiguration of the main roof profile insufficient rear yard excessive f they are an insufficient sidey setback I'd like to just note that almost all of the violations are existing non-conforming violations there are no uh new violations except the DI Minimus increase in the FI to the raare of the property um the you know building footprint itself is not changing as you can see from the plans and and Ben will go over thus all the violations again are for pre-existing non-conforming use except for the F violation um at this point I'll turn it over to Ben and Ben can review the plans for the board and then we'll take testimony or or questions morning everyone thank you good morning everyone thank you for your time um as uh Fran mentioned this is a project for my family and I uh in the hopes that we can stay within the South Boston community and not have to move out of the city so it's a modest uh addition off to the back that is going to be placed above an existing uh one story uh uh condo that is uh on PE Street and it'll be two stories of of that that'll actually fill in uh an irregular shape of our existing building that is on the existing block so the goal is really just to uh fill in the area for added square footage for our unit and uh provide an extra bedroom for uh future Shel thank you questions from the board hearing none we have public testimony hello Madam chair members of the board lyan flasky within mayor's office of neighborhood services and a Butters meeting was hosted on December 18th 2023 during which time some of Butters were concerned over light blockage and the inclusion of a roof deck in the proposed uh the prop proposal relating to the potential uh noise that could occur some in attendance were pleased with the architecture uh set in context with the neighborhood and the effort to align with the surrounding properties additionally our office received one letter of support from an abutter and a letter of support from the city Point neighborhood association at this time our offices is unaware of any additional concerns with this application we would like to defer to the Judgment of the board thank you thank you good afternoon Madam sharers and members of the board this is Laura toana from Council Flynn's office at this moment Council of Flyn would like to go on record in opposition due to the presence of the roof deck in the project Cil Flynn has a longstanding policy opposing roof decks in residential areas of South Boston due to the negative impacts that have resulted for many years in South Boston and were subsequently Exar in recent years in the form of parties at all hours of the night and trash remov issues with South Boston having become as much of a destination for young people on the weekend as as downtown Boston this issues emanating for roof decks have negatively impacted the quality of life for neighbors our seniors and person with disabilities and young families thank you thank you have no additional ra may have a motion motion to approve I have a second second Mr stbridge yes Mr Valencia yes Mr Braza yes Mr Collins yes Miss pado yes shair votes yes the motion carries good luck thank you madam chairman thank you board members what was that much next we have AC boa 157 2696 with the address of 804 east7 Street this is an article 80 case with the applicant and representative please explain to the board yes good afternoon thank you Mr strid good afternoon Madam chair members of the board my name is George morans I'm an attorney with the business address of 350 West Broadway in CIS Boston I represent cabat Ronin LLC and its principles Stuart malali and Ted Hearn this is as Mr stbridge noted an article lady small project uh which was originally approved by the bbda in 2022 and was approved by this board uh in June of that year Cav Ron and LLC is purchasing the approved project from the original applicant uh in conjunction with that purchase I filed a notice project change on behalf of my clients with the bbda last November which has been approved besides the transfer of ownership the uh NPC proposes a reduction in the number of approved dwelling units from 21 to 16 along with a reduction in the number of AUST parking spaces also from 21 to 16 uh a reduction in the projects f from 1.68 to 1.43 and an increase in the number of interior bicycle parking spaces from 2132 with an additional 10 outdoor visitor bicycle spaces all of this occurs within the existing building footprint with a very small addition on the garage side to allow for better configuration of the garage area and better maneuverability of vehicles uh it also Remains the case that there's no change to the building height from existing conditions additional changes and improvements include the creation of direct bikes access connecting both East 6 Street and east7 Street uh and that bike room would be serviced from both sides of the building as well along with exterior accessible ramp access for pedestrians connecting East 6th Street and East 7th Street there's been a redesign of the building's facade to be more consistent with the neighborhood's architectural bacular as well as additional Street trees on both the East 6th and East 7th Street sides of the building and the introduction of additional front Landscaping on the East 6th Street side of the building where the building's main garage is located it will be 11 two-bedroom units uh ranging from 910 to 1,88 square ft and five three bedroom units ranging from 115 to 1176 sare ft with respect to the zoning relief variances were previously granted in 2022 for of the five violations cited on the present Z refus the letter it is requested that the board regant those variances for the same reasons as they were originally granted as well as gpod approval under article 29 in support of the gpod permit being sought it is noted that the site is an appropriate one for the proposed use as it is zoned multif family residential appropriate facilities will be maintained for the use adequate vehicular access will be provided and as the particular activity will occur on the East 6th Street side of the site which is not facing Bay Boulevard the green belt roadway in question there will be no adverse effects on the Green Belt roadway significant Landscaping treatment will ensure that the natural aesthetic quality of green belt roadway will be maintained and finally and as previously mentioned the design of the building is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood with that Madam chair I'll pause and take any questions that members may have thank you Mr Mory any questions from the board can you speak to the IDP units uh yes Miss Pato uh the number of units were reduced from 21 to 16 it was commens reduction in the number of IDP units from 3 to two one of which is a two-bedroom unit and one of which is a freb un and uh I wanted to ask what uh if you can tell us the main reasons why you decided to reduce the project from from 21 to6 is that hous so I'm very curious to hear why you are reducing the number of units but the the previous project um as I said I represented the the owners at that time they quickly um quickly realized that it was maybe not going to be a very bu a very buildable project in terms of the project finances um um Mr malali and Mr Hearn looked at it and thought that the project would work better with fewer but larger units uh and they made the decision to do that based essentially upon the economics of uh you know trying to uh adap reuse and adapt this existing building uh which became more expensive I think than was originally envisioned thank you thank you any other questions from the board I have public testimony hello Madam chair and members of the board Lydia plasy with the M's office of Neighborhood Services I'm on January 3rd the bpda host held a virtual public meeting and conducted Community process for this proposal on January 17th the bpda board approved The Proposal with Community Support Community concerns voiced uh prior and regards this proposal include volume of units added to an already dense residential Corridor additional scarcity of on street parking and an increase in traffic along residential streets surrounding the development size and scale of the project concerns over architectural context and lack of Green Space community support for the proposal included a need for more residential units in South Boston positive transformation of an older building support for the architectural style and overall neighborhood beautification this proposal would bring we are unaware of any additional uh anything additional at this time with that we would like defer to the Judgment of the board thank you hi can you hear me uh yes ma'am okay thank you um so Lan o Conor um president of the city Point neighborhood association we um listen to the present presentation from Stuart malale as well as George Mory and this was a prior uh nursing home it's a great building um we are in support of this he answered all of of our questions the architectural style fits in with Day Boulevard and we are very happy that the units were reduced from 21 to 16 we did not support rise when they were the um owners and developers of this project Stuart came in Stuart malali gave us the changes and those changes are supported and as well as the beautification of the neighborhood and keeping within our housing stock style now do we want to see large projects like this in City Point all the time no we don't but this is a great reuse of this particular building and he is in fact staying within the forr thank you thank you good afternoon shers and members of the board this is ler Co office cons would like to go on record and support due to a good Community process and the proponent incorporating the feedback of neighbors regarding the number and composition of the units the design parking and other quality of life issues the the previous iteration of the project was 21 units and 21 parking spaces the latest version is now is now 16 units and 16 parking spaces which is more in line with the neighborhood feedback C of FL respectfully requests that the proponent continue to work closely with neighbors and the Civic group on any quality of life issues are arise during the constraction construction phase thank you thank you have no Reas okay with that may I have a motion may I have a motion a motion to approve with BPD isign a second Mr stbridge yes Mr valencio yes m b brazza yes Mr Collins yes M pado yes CH votes yes motion carries thank you next we have have two companion cases first is case boa 155 6767 with the address of 156 West Newton Street along with that we have case bo8 155 6768 also with the address of 156 West Newton Street if the applicant and representative presid explain the case to the board please the companies go ahead hello um this is my name is Joe harand I'm a partner at the har companies um we are working for the herma family Greg and Ito kma um we are asking for Relief today on gcod we've U have approval from Boston one store to do a g chod um system at the home the the uh the other item that we're looking for we on is the excessive FL air uh area ratio we are off by 64 sare ft on the garden level we've gone through extensive neighborhood process and um the the uh Rutland Square Association I believe that we have um the full support of both but I'll let them speak um for themselves um the biggest concern on this project was the magnolia tree out back and the um current owners of this building share the concerns of the neighbor Neighbors and um I think they were impressed at the the level of effort they've gone through so far to design around that tree and to make sure that that tree is protected um I'm going to defer to Justin white in mind office who's the architect that designed it so uh as Joe stated it's it's a full gut renovation of uh the full single family uh we are proposing a one story rear addition that is 6 ft um off of garden level uh we've done this several times in the south end it works well uh to to gain the extra square footage to accommodate a single car um inside it also works well because of the uh the deck on the on the street level which can then sit right on top of it um there's a code that allows us to basically reapportion the square footage uh we are removing the rear oral um and then adding uh 13 ft for that one story addition there's also a 50 square foot uh square footage um that's allowed in code Vision so as Joe had stated were basically asking for uh right around 60 additional Square ft for the building uh to make this work next next [Music] slide um one other item that we are asking for is a um is a Deb above that due to the floor plant um design being that the kitchen is on Department level questions from the board and then yes if um uh just kind of reviewing the bpda comments regarding uh the location of the pro property that it's in the sea fraud and F FL hazardous area uh are you referring to the gcod uh no so maybe um Jeff Hampton can speak on this but there was comments about potential uh you know basically the idea that you there that the bpda is not really moving projects forward in regarding to basement livable space when a property is under um sea fraud and uh FEMA flood area we we're this is the first time we're unaware of that new uh standard we renovate the garden levels of every single full G model that we do in the sou end so this could be and and so this is why I would like for Jeff to comment on it because um you know some some of it is kind of far away from um sea level uh but you know this is more inwards in the city so I just want to get his assessment on it yeah uh thank you madam chair members of the board Jeff hon bpda uh my apologies Mr baraz on the FEMA uh notation that should have been taken out okay because that far in it's not lower rockberry or any of those areas that are grown to it however it is still in the sea fraud and even though it is you know the sea fraud regulations aren't applicable to a project this small as you would noted earlier um we are taking a policy stand against uh having livable space in areas that uh are pro def flooding and are in the seaa even though those regulations don't apply uh it's you know one right here on West Newton and as I'm sure you're aware uh you know tipping my hand already uh the next case on North Margin is also the same reasoning uh for our rejections so okay that's that's great thank you um I figure that but I just wanted clarification because there's so many Garden levels in the south then so thank you for that explanation no further question question for the applicant um it's going from three family to one family is it currently occupied by three family it is not currently occupied the entire building the entire building is not occupied thank mayam public testimony Madam chair members of the board Conor Newman with the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services this time the mayor's off like to defer to the judge from this board understand that uh the on held of butter meing was a positive one and that the applicant reached out to the pilot block neighborhood association uh which I don't believe had any concerns or any opposition to this proposal with that we refer to the board at this time thank you thank you Mr simell Madam chair members of the board Christian selli Boston gr trust and we have both thank you have no rais hands thank you okay with that may I have a motion Madam chair i' like to put forward a motion for approval for gcod and also um approval with a provisor that the project under goes a South End Landmark commission review is there a second second stbridge yes Mr Valencia yes mza yes Mr Collins yes Miss pado yes here votes yes motion carries thank you Bo thank you next we have case boa 56443 with the address of 64 North Margin Street with the applicant and all their representatives present we'll be explain through the board please uh yes good afternoon Madam chair members of the board attorney Nick suula MC der mcqu Miller and Hanley here in Boston 28 State Street um with me today is Tom MOSI you can see on our uh Opening screen uh Tom is the uh uh property owner he acquired the building in September of 2022 made a lot of overall building and life safety improvements to date uh and this specific appeal is kind of the final step in that process Tom is the project proponent he's the Builder and he's actually the architect as well um and you can see the building here uh in tan uh in the center of the picture on the left uh next slide please Madame Ambassador uh just to uh let everybody know the parameters of the project the existing building it's a 9unit residential building with the management office on the ground level uh there's it's a five-story building it has an existing basement Garden level area that's currently used for storage uh and building uh uh building uh HVAC mechanical Etc um it's a full height basement there's a rear garden and a light well that goes down through the entire uh section of the building which you'll see in a second and the proposal on the bottom is to expand one of the units the first floor unit livable space uh into that existing Garden level uh again there will remain that full height uh walk out to the rear garden and there is a light well that provides light and air down into that lower level unit that lower level space excuse me and this would require no expansion outside of the existing building envelope that downstairs area would provide about 900 a little less a th000 square ft of additional living area and you'll see in a minute the plan is for this uh unit 1 R for the the appellant uh to move into this space actually with his growing family from the south end which is's outgrown uh into the North End so he actually will live in this unit and on site uh where he'll manage the building himself site uh next slide please Madam Ambassador this is just to show uh the adequate light air uh in that it's actually a walk out it's a basement in the in in the manner that from the front it's below grade but as you walk out to the rear it's actually a full walk out um you can see on the left hand side both photos show the existing uh space as it is uh now that's actually me as a model for scale in the bottom left uh I'm about 6'1 6'2 on a good day and you can see that there's a lot of height there uh even now um in that area and on the right hand side two uh photos of that rear area that's a walk out which would be uh adjacent to this lower level space as well uh next slide please um this is uh just the existing what's there now left side is the existing unit you can see the unit is uh only about 570 Square ft so it's a rather small unit in the rear and then that management office towards the front of the building the lower the lower half of the the lower part of the slide is Margin Street the top part is the uh rear of the building and you can see on the right hand side that's the uh space at issue The Unfinished space and you can see to the top uh that walk out to the Garden uh the Garden area and then that light well uh which provides light and air uh down there now uh next slide would just be proposed to show you what the plan is again you can see that management office remains uh a little bit of a re the configuration of that uh first floor level and then the lower level is planned to be again attached to the uh to the main level that unit 1 R that's there now uh about 1,000 square ft the downstairs rear would be a kitchen dining room living area with new windows and access to that rear Garden so the ability to walk in and out and use that private open space and then towards the front you can see a bedroom being added that does have light and air uh from that light web and a full bath as well and then a half bath down there as well again this would be connected to that first four uh by an internal state next slide please this is just a building section just to evidence quickly that you could see that although the the first half of the uh towards Margin Street is technically basement as you go further back due to the theg grade change and just due to the building uh it actually walks right out to that patio and garden and appos to the Sea fraud uh and the the comments from the bpda which I'm happy to address you can see in that patio Garden level there is uh already a recharge system in there we actually were uh approved for gcod back in 2023 due to the overall renovation and Rehabilitation of the building for all the other floors um we actually went through gcod and got approval for all the groundwater conservation the pipes the recharge and all of that uh with the PW USC and and uh Christian at the uh Boston groundwater trust uh next slide is just our zoning refusal letter uh which Mr uh which is just showing all we need is floor area ratio because we're uh recapturing that existing space in the basement we do not and we're not triggered for C fraud we don't R we don't trigger that under their applicability then uh you guidelines for C fraud so we were just cited for f and then the final slide which I'm sure the May mayor's office will speak to Madame Ambassador if you could scroll down is just our our Outreach we did meet with the clickable neighbor groups who got support uh in non opposition um I'm happy to stop here and take questions I'm happy to answer go right into the C fraud if you'd like as well I know Miss better Baraza asked previously so I'll pause here and wait my turn thank you thank you uh any questions from the board no question because um attorney Zula said that the project did not trigger any uh sea fraud of restrictions it is on an overlay District but it didn't trigger it thank you any questions from the board hearing none may have public testimony yes madame chair members of the board call or Newman with the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services this time the mayor's off defer to the Judgment of this board some background information on the community process and a Butter's meeting was held on February 15th um by and large was a very positive meeting some of Butters have raised some concerns about uh construction um I believe it might be related to noise uh they went on the applicant went on to meet with uh nura which they received a letter of non objection and on to new Nick which they received a letter of support we also have 28 letters of support I'm told uh those who have been shared with the board of that information will defer to the board at this time thank you good afternoon Madame chair members of the board Sebastian from Council toa's Office the council will have to go and support this project thank you no raise hands with that may I have a motion Madam chair I'd like to put for a motion really I think this project is commendable to preserve the commercial space a little bit of uh and on the first floor um with that I like to put forward a motion of approval Mr second second Mr stbridge yes M valenci yes M Bar Braza yes Mr Collins yes Miss pado yes chair votes yes motion carries thank you next we have case bo8 56379 with the address of 135 Falcon Street if the applicant and the representative presid will they explain the case to the board pleas yes thank you Mr Samra and good afternoon again Madam chair members of the board Richard Lind with a business address of 245 Sun Street he's Bost on behalf of the petitioner with me is Doug stephanov stephanov Architects we jump down a slide two uh Madam chair this is a existing two family dwelling located the eagle Hill section of East Boston it's a corner lock condition on the corner of ham Falcon Street our proposal would involve changing the occupancy from a two family dwelling to a three family dwelling which includes a one-story vertical Edition uh we can jump down to the next slide please uh one more perfect uh just real quickly by way of summary and I don't want to sound like a broken record but uh we have the new zoning um article for East Boston uh this will be located the EV3 District as you can see the comparison and changes a number of these um uh zoning regulations that were applicable in the prior version of Artic 53 would trigger relief uh for a number of items as you can see we pretty much compli uh if not fully with all of the requirements for EV3 I would point out that the footprint of our building does not change uh it currently occupies 58% of the um lot area uh because this is a corter loock condition EV3 allows for up to 75% coverage so we actually have a bit of room if we wanted to expand the building uh permeable area um for Corner lock condition is 15% uh we have that 288 Square ft uh towards the rear of the building uh which should not be an issue uh with respect to the remaining items um use would be permitted uh as a three family and then all the other uh sort of dimensional controls that existed previously article 53 are either eliminated uh or were in compliance as a pre-existing non-conforming structure uh next slide please just a quick overview of the surrounding context uh the site is a bit sloped as you go up putham Street we can go down to slide eight that probably shows a good example of what we're looking at slide eight please perfect uh so you can see here the existing condition of the building um you know as I said putam Street does slope up uh towards Eagle Hill uh we do have an exposed condition for the existing Foundation which doesn't uh get picked up on the other side of the street because the slope goes the other way uh our proposal would not seek to add any liable space at that lower level there are no flood or sea fra issues at this location um we would continue to use that for ility and for storage next slide please different view next slide uh so our comparison is here showing the U proposed addition uh we do propose a roof deck as well that is accessed by a hatch um while this does not necessarily seem like it um aligns with existing Heights along that section of Falcon Street I would point out that both um current zoning I should say prior zoning and now curent zoning uh both allowed this level of height the only difference being is uh we were allowed to have 2 and a half stories 35 ft under PRI zoning this is allowing a full third story with 35 ft height limit under new zoning so this is compliant although not necessarily representative of some of the buildings imediately to its right uh I would guess that the amendments to article 53 contemplated this type of um um change to buildings including vertical additions to allow additional hous units and I believe that is one of the reasons why the bpda has recommended approval for this project because of its alignment with new zoning next slide please uh just our left side view uh you can see we are proposing uh two rear balconies off of the back of the building there are no stairwells accessing them um we do uh obviously are required to upgrade the light safe to the building based upon the chain BL can see uh you can see the proposed roof deck as well next slide just our right side which is pretty much set of the lot line in the rear uh view of our building uh I will point out that the um parking that was proposed originally for this site was to have three parking spaces we did here through the community process uh to reduce the number of uh parking spaces down to two um as I mentioned in Prior presentations new zoning uh does not require any parking for up to three units in the East Boston Neighborhood uh and therefore even though we are propos osing two parking spaces we would be in compliance with the parking regulations uh also by reducing it down to two parking spaces we're able to uh better address the permeability of the site and to ensure that we're meeting that 15% even though we're not necessarily required to next slide please uh we can jump down to the floor plans I believe is um slide 17 here we go um so as you can see on the left side that's that basement level that is Expos we are proposing to maintain that as I said for storage and utilities uh the first level second level and third level are all shown and then the roof deck that's exclusive to unit three uh only uh and with that I think I can stop and address any questions or comments on the board thank you any questions from the board hearing none may have public testimony hello Madam chair members of the board mivia Gomez with the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services on hosted an AB Butter's meeting for this project on January 4th 2024 three AB Butters are present on the call a butter shared concerns about the parking as they didn't think it would be able to fit all the cars the plan originally proposed the proponent did meet with the eagle Hill civic association and the group voted to oppose the project the vote was seven in support and 12 in opposition at this time our office would like to defer judgment to the board thank you good afternoon Madam chair members of the board Sebastian par from councel K's office based on its compliance with his Boston plan is Boston the councilor would like to go and support this project thank you any of the elected official offices no okay I'll go to Haley and then caller 862 hi good afternoon board members U my name is Haley Richards resident of 137 Falcon Street um I would like to I am in opposition of this build as it currently sits due to the overshadowing caused by the proposed building's height it will cause a severe impct to the living conditions at 137 Falcon Street by reducing sunlight exposure which is vital for both physical and mental health the um the other residents of 137 Falcon who I knowwhere on this call as well are in the same camp um that said overall compliance with the zoning laws is not merely just a bureaucratic formality but a crucial mechanism to ensure that all developments contribute positively to the fabric of the community that they join and I strongly feel that this building revision is not in service of that thank you thank you [Music] Brandon yes thank you good afternoon mam chairing the bo members of the board my name is Brandy garik I reside at 137 Falcon street directly across from this property as well um similar to Haley here today to express my strong opposition to the proposed Redevelopment plan as Haley had noted this will significantly impact the natural light that enters our home um which obviously has health and psychological impacts uh but was also contributing factor in a decision to to purchase our home here and make the investment that we have um additionally I'm concerned about the setting a presedent a precedent excuse me uh and improving such as only exception for future development projects in our area so I would urge the board carefully to consider these adverse effects um thank you for your consideration thank you a caller hi good afternoon thas par I'm also in opposition of the project represent the 137 off the street here this is a new build for us so since we didn't have time to actually uh attend this other's meeting my unit in particular is on the top floor and because of this I have melted ceiling and the only windows in my unit are W for pting this project is to my left so um adding additional stor and additional root that you my window so wanted to just exess my position there still good plan as well on the front of the building the basement level is fully closed to the grade of Eagle Hill this would visually be a four story building with a just want to point that out on the corner that um also just in addition to the the issues with the additional story blocking light on our property also don't think architecture into the neighborhood thank thank you mayor are there any other raised hands no Madam Shar uh yes sir M thank you madam chair so a couple quick uh comments so I I hear the concerns that were being raised regarding the um light and Shadow and impact that this would have I I would reiterate to the board members the height of this building is compliant with the new Zoning for find e Boston so while we were cited for height under the prior version of article 53 this is compliant in addition the proposed roof deck is also compliant with the planning spots and recommendations for roof decks with respect to setting a precedent um I'm afraid that we're not the ones that will be setting the precedent here uh as the new zoning article for article 53 uh has already established that so three family or three story building uh in this neighborhood is the norm at this point um so there is not any concern over a precedent being said because this would be the as of right height for the area last I will point out um that that with respect to the um I believe there was also a comment about um sorry um the comment about the height of the building with the um uh the exposed Foundation sure as this board is aware the definition of first story under Article 2 uh is pretty clear it is that portion of the building which is 65% or more above grad the first story of this building is actually the full the first main story and that's because of the fact that it is a corner lock uh and is bounded by sidewalks on both the left side of the building in front uh and therefore although it may present as a four-story building uh technically under the zoning uh definition it is a three-story building and the height is measured from the average grade which again would be a compliant uh condition under both prior zoning as well as current zoning thank you madam chair thank you any other questions from the board hearing none may I have a motion a motion to approve ppda design review is there a second second uh Mr stbridge yes Mr Valencia yes Miss B brazza yes Mr Collins yes monado yes fa votes yes motion carries uh let's take a 15minute break thank you recording stop e e e e