##VIDEO ID:D0Y3o2vLE0U## The Boston Zoning Board of Appeal hearing for December ten, twenty twenty four is now in session. This hearing is being conducted in accordance with applicable provisions of the open meeting law including the provisions enacted by the legislature last year. The new law allows the board to continue its practice of holding virtual hearings until March 20 25. This hearing of the board is being held remotely via the June webinar event at 4pm. This hearing is also being live streamed in order to ensure this hearing of the board is open to the public. Members the public may access this hearing through telephone and video conferencing.  The information for connecting to this hearing is listed on today's hearing agenda which is posted on the public notices page of the city's website Boston Gudkov. Members of the public will enter the virtual hearing as attendees which means you will not see or saw on the screen and you will be muted throughout unless administratively unmuted when asked to comment what 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 while presenting to the board.  >> As with our in-person meetings, comments and support will be followed by comments in opposition. The order of comments is as follows elected officials, representatives of elected officials and members of the public. The chair may limit the number of people called upon to offer comment and the time for commenting is time constraints required. For that reason the board prefers to hear from members of the public were most impacted by a project that is those individuals who live closest to the project.  If you wish to comment on NPR. Please click the raise hand button along the bottom of your screen in the Zoom webinar platform click again and your hands should go down when the host sees your hand and you will receive a request on yourself. So yes and you should be able to talk if you are connected to the hearing by telephone please press star nine to raise and lower your hand you must press star six to unmuted yourself after you receive the request from the host.  Those called upon to comment will be asked to state their name and address first and then can provide their comment in the interest of time and to ensure that you have enough time to do so. Please raise your hand as soon as Mr. Stembridge reads the address into the record. Do not raise your hand before the relevant address is called or the meeting post will not know to call on you at the appropriate time Mr. Stembridge . Good morning Mr. Luzia I'm sure pleasant. Good morning Miss.  >> We well good morning Madam Chair present. Good morning Miss Panaro. Good morning Madam Chair present.  Good morning Mr. Collins. Morning Madam Chair President. Good morning.  Just a note that we are a six member board and with that I will turn it over to Mr. Stembridge Sproing Madam Chair. But the seventh member has joined the S..  Oh, there's a seventh member. Yeah my apologies. Whose are my missing Allen Allen OK, I'm so sorry. It's quite all right Mr. Langham.  Good morning Madam President. Good morning.  Thank you for letting me know now the floor is yours so we are as remember fourth floor is yours, Mr. Stembridge. Thank you Madam Chair.  We'll begin with the approval of hearing minutes nine thirty this morning we have for November 7th and November 9th.  With that I'll make a motion to vote to approve. May I have a second set then Mr. Stembridge?  Yes, Mr. Valencia. Yes.  As we well yes. Miss Panaro. Yes. Mr. Collins. Yes. Mr. Langham. yes votes yes. >> Motion carries that will go to the extension scheduled for nine thirty am I there are three this morning I will read them all in the all reasonable within a year's time frame for the request so that we begin with case and be aware one two one three zero nine with the address of fourteen a Blue Hill and next we have a case VOA one one eight five five eight two with the address of twelve George Street at five twenty we had a case delayed one three four nine zero two five with the address of eleven fifty three to eleven fifty five Washo the street those other cases we have today any questions from the board?  May I have a motion to grant the extensions as requested motion to remain the most requested so thank you Mr. Stembridge.  Yes Mr. Valencia. Yes Miss.  We well yes Miss Panaro. Yes.  Mr. Collins. Yes. Mr. Wellingham. Yes. chair votes yes motion carries next we have one final opportunity case for nine thirty. This is case we'll wait one four seven six eight seven six with the address of two. Forty six are if the applicant and been present would they please each one in case of a boy thank you Mrs. Coverage. Good morning Madam Chair. Members of the board for the record wins for the business hours of to forty five summers response on Petitioner Madam Chair the board may recall this product was approved back in October of twenty twenty three to allow the construction of a four story nine unit multifamily residential with one voluntary IEP unit the board subjected that decision to a proviso for design review with the Boston Department of the Department completed its review.  But during that process a stairwell in the rear of the property that is within the building was required to be modified and enclosed and therefore when we resubmitted these back I as d because the lease had been granted for etc. This was cited as a board final after if we jump down to slide 14 that will probably provide the perspective that will be most helpful for the board's consideration.  This is probably a good place to start on the right side of the stream I believe we have our street on the left side of the screen.  I would be the leader portion of the building. The shaded area is the enclosed stairwell which goes out to the fourth level that is to provide the appropriate means of egress for those upper level units for open access from a corner one thing I will point out is that the board did approve this under the prior version article fifty three since this was approved of the amendment to article fifty three wanted to in fact Article fifty three Section thirteen permits the vertical addition to a non conforming building which this would be provided that you stay within the existing building footprint and not see the height so otherwise this would be as of right because it was approved and requires zoning.  We do require one final order in order to modify the plan as presented. I'm happy to answer any questions from the board on this modification. Thank you. Any questions from the board hearing our motion in the previous session Zaken Mr. Stembridge yes, Mr. Valenciennes. Yes. As we well yes.  Mr. Canaro.  Yes. Mr. Collins. Yes. Mr. Langham. Yes. Your vote yes motion Carrasquillo.  Thank you very much.  Next we'll move on to the recommendations from the recent subcommittee hearing.  Start off with a vote one six two nine six six six put the address of Twenty Twenty Street the case was approved next we have case voting one five seven seven three three two with the address of this team and this this case was approved.  Next we have a case VOA one six two six four three seven with the address fifty eight Central Avenue. This case was approved where we have read discussion case which case V. Away one six one three eight seven with the address of forty three forty five would have in this case was deferred until we've given her until January twenty third of twenty twenty five.  Those are the results from the subcommittee hearing questions from the board.  >> May I have a motion motion to produce subcommittee recommendations a second. Thank you Mr. Stembridge. Yes Mr. Valencia.  Yes miss me well yes Miss Panaro. Yes Mr. Collins. Yes. Mr. Langham. Yes. Chair votes yes. >> The motion carries there will move on through the hearing was scheduled for nine thirty a.m. and with that we will ask if there are any requests for withdrawal or deferrals from this or that. >> Mr. Robocalling. Yes.  Good morning to Madam Chair and the board.  We're going to also Derek Rubinoff Architects eighty to dash eighty for Spring Street West Roxbury. We'd like to defer case be away one six five Theodore REO to sum it up thank you so that this will be for KVOA from one six five three three nine with the address of three or two Summertown No would you go ahead.  Oh yes we were we had doing a public process realized that we needed an additional there was additional zoning violation we needed roof relief for four usable open space and we sent the drawings updated drawings to Stephanie to get those reviewed and they were reviewed but not in time before the ad went out.  And so Stephanie emailed me on the 21st of November and asked that we defer to withdraw dates so that the project can be re advertised reflect the updated refusal letter with the additional violation and any questions from the board.  What dates do we have we can do January twenty eight February for our five between Mr. Rubinoff January 28th with the great I think may I have a motion motion to defer back to January twenty now the second I can Mr. Stembridge.  Yes Mr. Valencia. Yes we well yes. This matter of yes Mr. Collins. Yes, Mr. Lanham. Yes. Yes. Motion carries thank you.  There are any further requests for withdrawal from Sakra near done. Then we'll move on to his new age one five seven one two four zero with the address of thirteen.  We want Avenal if the applicant and or their representative present for his yes. Good morning Madam Chair. Members of the board my name is George Morante an attorney with a business address at three fifty West Broadway in Talbot and also here today and Derrick Jackson, project architect. Thank you for introducing the case Mr. Stembridge.  This is an application to change the legal occupancy of the building at Thirteen Fremont Avenue an option to work family dwelling and to expand living space by means of two roof dormers, a rear edition and the refinishing of the existing finished basement. The present legal occupancy is a fraternal club and temple. The building was used by its previous owner, the Rosicrucian Water Property is located in a three four thousand zoning subdistrict subdistricts.  Cleveland Avenue is a cul de sac which runs above average street and its intersection with North Beacon Street.  There are a number of one, two, three and multi-family buildings in the area including directly next door to the Project Safety 175 unit fifteen Beacon Street condominium building the existing building is two and a half storeys consisting of a finished open basement first floor with kitchen living room bathroom window offices and the second floor function room. The proposed scope of work calls for a rare addition measuring approximately 15 feet a 19 feet wide the addition of a shed dormer on each side of the current pitched roof.  The result would be new occupancy of four units unit one being a bi level two bedroom unit on the basement and first door of the building with both unit bedrooms located on the first floor, a two bedroom unit located entirely on the first floor and a three bedroom unit located on each of the second and third floors. The building's front porch will be lowered in the front yard area regraded to allow for additional light and air exposure for the basement living area of Unit one. With respect to zoning there are dimensional violations which as the planning department recommendation notes are existing conditions not being changed but which are triggered by the proposed scope of work. These are the violations owing to the minimum lot area in minimum one area for the additional dwelling units as the recommendation points out of course the light side is not changing and these violations go to the existing approximately 3000 326 square foot lifesize. These other violations that go to existing conditions are the life front page violation in the front yard setback violation neither of which is being changed. No parking is to be provided which requires a variance again the planning department recommending notes there is no way to introduce parking to the lot.  The site is in close proximity to bus stop and be to Route 57 in five or one and lack of parking is consistent with BTD minimum parking ratios.  There's a violation for exceeding the maximum building height which is thirty five feet. This is in fact that the two dormers that had to be added create a third floor but the height of the hammer is actually below the top pointed to buildings existing PETCH roof thus minimizing any effect or even perception of the increase in zoning eight the overall building height of the building to the pitch the roof is not being increased. There's also a violation the lack usable open space again is the planning recommendation, notes the amount provided open space at approximately five hundred fifty square feet per unit is not inconsistent with surrounding neighborhood conditions nor is it proposed that they are at one point seven which is in fact in excess of the zoning maximum of point eight but again which is typical of prevailing conditions in the surrounding neighborhood.  But that Madam Chair members I would stop and would be happy to answer any questions. Thank you. I get questions from the board hearing that public testimony. Madam Chair, are members the board ciggie Johnson with the Office of Neighborhood Services our office hosted Buttars meeting regarding his proposal in early twenty twenty four at which concerned a raise regarding parking and maneuverability on short dead end street as well as a concern about open space and the loss of mature trees on the property proponent presented to the Allston Civic Association and their membership is supportive of the proposal. With that background we defer to the judgment of the board.  Thank you. Thank you.  I see no additional hands. Thank you. Was that may have a motion I have a second back but Mr. Stembridge.  Yeah. Mr. Valencia. Yes.  As we well yes. Mr. Manado. Yes department.  Yes. Mr. Langham. Yes.  Chair votes yes motion carries that we have VOA one six six six six to four with the address one twelve street. This is our hour in case brought to us by the mayor's office of and the Outlook and the and or the representative of the president of the people in the case of the boy. >> Yes sir. Good morning Secretary Stembridge Madam Chair, members of the board attorney Joe Hanley from McDermott Kolton, Miller and Hanley here at twenty State Street in Boston. I have the pleasure of representing the Fenway CDC who is with me here today.  I'll start with this slide just to introduce you to the team Sainath John Ed Quinn and Nick Petmin are leadership staff with the Fenway CDC who are on with me also here as part of the presentation is Rob Del Salvio from EMBARK Architects.  And just to give you sort of a high level overview here one twelve Queensbury Street in the West Fenway is the site which the Fenway CDC seeks to revitalize and replace a long existing sort of defunct single story retails structure in the residential neighborhood in order to create much needed affordable housing for working individuals and families. We have worked closely with the mayor's office of Housing. We are also compliant with the recently updated texta amendment for allowance of no parking at Affordable Developments which is supported by the watershed in the location as well as certainty of D members measures excuse me and the principal facade will be brick with Carstone accents and we are building to passive house standards. Next slide please.  So context map and just to put this into perspective as well the Fenway CDC is a over fifty years of service providing affordable housing and services to folks in the Fenway community. Over six hundred and fifty families, individuals who are housed through the Fenway CDC so this is right in their catchment area. You'll see the site in red here. What this is depicted to show is the box as well. You see between three to six public subway stations and numerous bus routes within close proximity to this site. So it's really ideal for the residential use but also the the parking no parking configuration. Next slide please.  So just a broader picture to give you a sense of the overall neighborhood and I'll get into the relief briefly. You'll see the existing building and its context in the red hash and more importantly in addition to all the transit outlets within close proximity, you also have a number of public parks which helps to support our open space Berryman's next slide please.  And just to bring you closer up, you'll see sort of the missing tooth, if you will in the red hash that is the existing single storeys nondescript commercial building that would be replaced by the project. Next slide please.  So site context these three views from the front right, center and left. You can see from the upper side again the single story existing structure that is vacant is a former laundromat and towards the lower left and upper right you can see the views on each side there's a shared alleyway that runs along the side and as part of this presentation or part of this project rather we've had very thorough and instructive outreach with our immediate Buttars in support of this project. Next slide please.  So just to give you the building metrics which you'll see in Plan B a little bit, the site itself is approximately four thousand three hundred and twenty four square feet. The floor area ratio which we're proposing is four point forty nine.  The building zero square feet for the new building will be just under twenty thousand gross nineteen thousand six hundred and thirty six square feet and twenty four units of all affordable housing intended to address the need for single working families and the like with a mix of studios and one bedrooms and we've also worked hard to introduce both visitor and resident bike parking and public realm and improvements towards the front of the site which you'll see here next slide please to take you through the zoning code.  We are in the Mafa zone here.  Obviously the existing structure to be remained is a non conforming structure that's vacant and noncontributing we require belief and in five areas the first is basement units and I think it's important to note here that of the twenty four units only one is considered to be a basement and it's been designed with appropriate measures.  So it's it's minimal in the relief necessary.  The factor which is allowed here is for this project seeks a four point three nine so it is both within context of its surrounding characteristics the scale but also de minimis and reasonable as necessary. And you'll see that as the project complies with the building height with a lot with and a lot frontage open space variance right now there are there is none it's a very tight site. What we've done is introduced open space in the maximum allowable way in order to introduce affordable housing and also realizing that we were in a great location with several nearby parks. The front garden setback is essentially modal which is required but there are a few bays that project and add to its architectural design and finally the rear yard setback which is also an existing nonconformity and is supported by the aspects of this site required is 20 and we're basically at the plot line at the rear next slide you'll see the zoning refused the letter which do not need to go through but it essentially taps on all five of those areas. I'd like to hand it over to Rob to Salvio to take you quickly through the presentation. Rob.  Thanks, Joe. We can go down to slides from here.  So I'll just start with a view of the exterior, the building you're standing at Queensferry Street looking at the building one 10 Queensborough is on your left one twelve Queensbury which is the subject of this discussion in the center and then to about an hour drive is on the right hand side of the distance.  The proposed building is predominantly masonry with various accents and details as well as a lot of precast courses in Cornish's lines with a mansard type roof condition of a metal panel as shown here. Next slide please site plan Queensbury Street again at the top of the page this site is surrounded on three sides by what is currently all paved surfaces because it relates to access easements for parking that's situated the back of the property for many of the surrounding buildings. The build site it's important to note slopes from the Queensferry St elevation down to the rear of the property about five and a half six feet or so which is what's going to facilitate that basement unit not really being that underground as you may think along the front of the property you are planning green space and seating area to push the building back and generally form with the building alignment of all the other buildings up and down very street. Although we do have the one front yard set back the areas are going for about two and a half feet. Next slide please on the ground floor Queensferry excuse the left hand side you enter the building is three units on this floor.  The stair elevator cores are also always situated in the bottom of the page facing the two eleven Partovi Street side and on the top of the page is the access drive which gets you down and other neighboring buildings to the rear parking lot Xigris.  >> The typical layout is shown here against combination of studios and one bedroom units, studios or about five hundred and twenty five square feet on average and the one bedrooms are approximately three hundred six hundred thirty square feet on average Excitement's backsliders and just go back up one place to the basement level.  So this is the base below plan again because this site is sloping so your map from Queensbury Street many of the US is not requiring windows situated on the left hand side but in the top right where you start the window line again is where we can get the one basement unit that Joe had been mentioning earlier. Next slide rooftop is planned for solar panels and other mechanical equipment or seek to get as many solar panels out there as we can safely accommodate on the roof x5 this is a view elevation on our street side you can see more clearly some of the aligned so we tried to achieve with changing in materials, cornice lines and the golf courses throughout the facade of the building slide.  This is the alley service drive elevation between our building and one ten Queensbury Street here you can see more clearly how the greatest sloping down from Queensbury Street to the rear are now excellent and just some of the material is talking about again the green with models or the green color will be about how good standing seam detail although the Carstone elements both cornices forces and watertable will be precast concrete and then the brick will feature a lot of detailing in the spanel conditions those between the windowsill and the window of adjoining floors excellent and that's all. Thank you Rob and Madam here just briefly one of the things I should have mentioned in the zoning overview there's a series of overlays that were in the first is the Groundwater Conservation or district. So in your records you should have the approval letter from Boston Water and Sewer and I know that you obviously take testimony from the groundwater trust. We want to thank them for their guidance on this and helping us in compliance with that requirement and we're also within the neighborhood to sign overlay in the greenbelt protection and restricted Park and district. Those were all carefully scoped and administered throughout the BPD a small project review process which resulted in their recommendation of approval in July of this year. So that concludes our presentation and thank you for your time, Madam Chair. >> Thank you. Any questions from the board? >> I am currently with the work of the family CBC. Can you just talk about the affordability levels on this project? >> Yeah Zinny are you on or do would you like me to handle that? Oh I can I can thank you. Talk about it. Thank you.  He'd be a member so we are at 60 percent am I Audiovox all units 100 percent affordable and 60 percent Amayo below.  Thank you. Any the questions from the boy just to piggyback on that I I have the the planning department memo and I see that three of the units set aside for the homeless individuals.  How are you of selling those individuals or families?  They they are being offered to us by the city so yeah. So the process comes from the city so it's not part of the lottery that we usually so the the city of these individuals families to us and we OK just going to make a comment that I really appreciate being able to see a 60 percent and three percent and the project is totally affordable. So thank you for that. Thank you, Mr. Valencia. Thank you for that rare public testimony.  >> Yes, Madam Chair members of the board continuing with the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services this town Mayor defer to the judgment this board as you hear from the applicant's representation they went through a BBA led committee process for planning to to elaborate to that our office is unaware of any concerns. Many in the community were pleased with the deep affordability as the mixture of units and its proximity in the neighborhood with that offer to the board. Thank you April.  Someone from planning want to speak.  Bye. Thank you Madam Chair and the members of the board. My name is Noris.  I was the project manager assigned to this well it came under a small project review application. I would just like to note that we held a virtual public meeting on June 18th of twenty twenty four and the project was very well received by the community in which we then recommended the project to our board on July 18th where we received approval. Thank you. Happy to answer any other questions.  Thank you Mr Simonelli. Good morning Madam Chair. Members of the board KRISHNASAMY Antibusing Trust and we have both. Jean-Claude led us from the thank you Lenny.  Good morning Chairman. Members of the board my name is Lilly with District eight City Council Sharing Dawkins' office at this time Councilor I would like to go on record in support of the application. She's excited about this affordable housing being built in the time I am linked to NYC because the capable housing developer eager to meet the urgent need and create this kind of housing in the city of Boston. So we urge the board to request this zoning.  Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, James. I sent a message to James Running Blue and I'm a resident of the Fenway. I've lived here since 2008 and I used to go to that location when it was clean. Is since it's been closed. So it was sort of a nice and now this new building project I think it's great but looking someone looking for affordable housing and I'm also a Fenway resident like I mentioned and I'm involved in the board in the community. >> Thank you. Thank you.  I see no additional raise hands. Madam Chair with that may I have a motion?  I will make a motion to approve . I think they're seeking this is once again putting Herkes review in article eating so yeah. So is your motion complete.  Looks like she may be frozen. I know she knows I can make a motion of approval. I think this is good project. I think the variances make sense and for providing them one hundred percent affordable units.  Thank you. Thank you Mr DEMERGE.  Mr Rudd's here he has got a brilliant copy to support we well yes Mr Collins. Yes Mr Lynham yes the chair votes yes the motion carries and it looks like this panel knows to get off and back on so thank thank you guys good luck. Thank you Madam Chair I have a good day. >> Thank you.  This case has been referred to that will take us to case be aware one six three three three zero with the address one over five street if the applicant and their representative present what they call hello good morning. This is their home from Blue Architecture. Madam Chairman of the Board thank you for hearing us today. You great.  Thank you. So this project is a small alteration in the front of the building see in the top right. So here you see an undisclosed wish to enclose to create a weather vestibule which would result in pushing a new staircase out further towards the sidewalk.  As you can see here, the other photos just show the rear on the sides of the building which don't change other than this front modification that you can see in the left side view.  So we can please turn to the next page plan.  It doesn't change much the roof in the porch structure lattice supports everything. Stay in place. We're just going to grab them with new walls and build the landing and staircase in front that you see on the right the site. Next slide please.  >> And this is just the survey version of the same thing so you can see that the set back changes accordingly. The new landing is slightly closer to that radius property line than the existing corner of the really next slide please . >> I was in conformance wise there are two categories existing over formatting both of which are getting slightly increased. One is the four requirements point six existing point seven four that's changing slightly two point seventy six if this is a different area. Similarly fifteen teams requirement currently seven point nine in the pushing of the steps forward results in six but even from the X please no change in the basement. We can just kind of roll through these four record next slide please.  >> That's a kind of assessment of what's going on the porch with open rails will become enclosed with walls windows to create that vestibule and into a new building and steps on the right top is the the major change there.  Next slide please.  No change upstairs or in the attic. Next slide please. And the exterior views to the left is just sticking to the right proposed. So it really, really what's happening there is the door doorbell and while Scott and blaming are all moving forward so they'll look in this view it's the same unchanged but it's as if the depth change. Next slide please.  So here's this idea.  You can see that really becoming enclosed no other changes to the house slide please review no change at all and keep going probably near the end here and on the other side you get the wooden porch becoming enclosed.  >> So that's it. We did meet with the abettors on October twenty seconds and with the Civic Association on November 6th and there were no objections.  So that's that's our position. Thank you. Thank you. Any questions from the board nonmarket the testimony, Madam Chairman, members of the board for the record my name is Jeremy Bambury.  I'm the Jamaica Plain community engagement specialist for the Office of Neighborhood Services . Babacan has completed the community process which consisted of an important meeting on October 22nd with no but in attendance. The proponent with Jamaica Plain Neighborhood Council they received approval to move forward.  Thank you for your time in the mayor's Office of Neighborhood Services. We'd like to defer to the. Thank you.  I see no reason Madam Chair with that man the motion megamall voted to approve that second Mr Stembridge.  >> Yeah Mr Valencia. Yes as we well yes was Panaro seemed to have my wi fi issues fixed your back now and yes Mr Lingham yes Cherryville just motion is good but thank you very much there we have a case VOA one six three six to eight three the address is nine Hillcroft Road.  If the applicant and their representative or president or the case to board it's your on for nine Hillcroft can you please raise your hand here and the suffering that Semba and our team members with me were here for nine Hillcroft in Jamaica Plain we proceed. I mean besides the ambassadors running the slides oh, all right. Good morning, Madam Chairperson and members of the Board of So Nine Hillcroft Road. It includes ulceration, the third floor and here is a look a little so you'll just have to instruct the ambassador Madam Ambassador a page you want to keep going to or she can keep moving next page.  All right. This page we have the existing at the top and the post at the bottom and alterations are going to be the third floor.  That's all there is a single family expanding space for a green family edition is there this is the dormi here is Chernof Beat about the Racheli next please.  Next page right here we have existing on the left and the list on the right and here we have the plug on next page this is next page please.  So this is Mr. Harpo's. Just for the record, can we get the next page please? Next page please keep scrolling but you walk us through what are the actual violations?  So what's the existing condition and what are you seeking? How is it exasperatedly at all ? All right, so the existing square footage is two thousand seven that's a hundred thirty nine and the proposed will be three thousand three hundred thirteen square feet. It will be over FARC by five hundred and seventy four square feet.  So that is its nonconforming because it's over for the far and also there's a height issue that is nonconforming but as our drawings will show it will remain below the original line about two feet two feet and next page piece and here we have the existing sort of staircase you see here is existing and will be building up above the existing space next page on the second floor of the ARE Demolition plan next page please X which is next page to sixteen is the other one is the proposed yeah.  This is our proposed plan to explain further the proposed base we have we have one bedroom and one bathroom and then we have to close it here.  So the addition of four we are there questions from the board? Yes. Madam Chair so I don't have the same plan I have it looks like I have a statement about and a wall here but I don't have any at least not the documents that I have.  I don't have any setbacks on.  And Madam Ambassador, do you have that in this and maybe we can hear from the planning department because I think their recommendation is to suggest that deferrals before plan reasons. Mr. Hampton.  Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. Members of the board, Jeff Ashton City boss, the Planning Department we echo what Mr. Collins had mentioned during that it looks like the site plan that was submitted for a project is actually on Cedarwood and so we really couldn't do it accurately analysis too because it doesn't show any of the setbacks from the existing building even though they may be existing nonconformity the site plans and correct and we really can't do an accurate recommendation it seems minimized but at the same time it's the wrong side plan. So we ask for a deferral so that they could be corrected paperworks IWD Steffanie, do you have that you could propose? Yes, No, we can do form every twenty thousand Marcheline but that give the applicant enough time to submit the plans.  Yes we'll have that submitted motion a motion to defer to February for a second again Mr. Stembridge. Yeah Mr. Valencia. Yes Miss. We well yes Miss Prado. Yes, Mr. Collins.  Yes. Mr. Langham. Yes. Yes the motion carries we'll see you then OK, there we have it be Boeing one six four five six one with the address of opportunity to eleven eighty six Hyde Park Avenue is the apple and the representable president. Will there please open the case? The boy yes. Has to go and look for Chairman George Grant or Jackson.  Look at what happened. What brings you here today? I live entertainment license make it clear that not doing changes with occupancy of any major renovations we hear shows that just live entertainment license other things.  Give me a brief break. Lion King George Brannaman carbonating portrays myself in recent grad.  I drove into the family business from the past 13 months which was pleasing Rabbi my mother.  So right now we're not together. Mom and I are running the family business and said upon stepping in common take things to the next level. Part of that was me bringing in allowed tainment aiming to bring in light jazz as well which is extremely exciting for our community upon present from the community we have nothing to support everyone's excited. It was to the point that article was published March 16th at my presentation just really showing the sign that they have what I can to bring we currently have an entertainment license to WINNINGHAM and we're looking to change that to a legitimate license to were previously known as the Hypercolor.  At one point there was a legitimate license but unfortunately they closed down. We actually lost a license. So I'm just looking back and the whole idea of bringing back that live I do see is the excitement of the six week seven year old was caught. Everyone was in support of me adding this aspect to the of know.  Yeah, that's pretty much my proposal as changing REGNER statement tonight. Thank.  >> And so no changes to seating or anything else. Nothing else.  OK, any questions from the board man public testimony Madam Chair, members of the board for the record my name is Jeremy Bambury and the Hyde Park Community Engagement Specialist for the Office Neighborhood Services. The applicant has completed the community process which consisted there's a meeting held on September 24th with no in attendance. Next up we're going to work with the Hyde Park Neighborhood Association where they gain support and we've also received two letters of opposition is that when the property does not work with parking issues and people blocking driveways as well as an increase in vandalism, inappropriate activity been served. Thank you for your time in the mayor's Office of Neighborhood Services would like to defer to the thank you. Any other questions from the board, Chris, are you here to speak on this project?  I'm here to comment on it as opposed I am I've been a landlord now for quite some time. The community at fifteen top level property in Hyde Park Avenue.  The parking has been a major, major concern of ours.  Our tenants have major issues as a result and I feel as though is that based on we are currently in that area parking is a going concern and our parking lot that we have is being involved involving anyone and everyone that can end up finding parking at any given time and I feel that was that providing additional means of individuals, although it sounds like a great business always for business but yet, you know, somehow we've got to figure out some sort of parking lot and being provided for it because they're continuously using our parking and it's just not fair to our tenants that's increased the violence.  It's increased with you know, already trash and so forth being being thrown their broken glass in some cases with also the building glass. It's been a problem. So it's been an ongoing issue with parking and having other people parking overnight as well perhaps for one reason or another.  So we're just not looking to add more to that is our concern . Thank you. I see no additional madam chair with the applicant like to briefly address those concerns. Yeah. Chris, where are you located there your direct unbuttons I believe 2015 the Hyde Park app. >> Yeah that well-beloved talking to you. I'm not even sure if that's in the proximity of where a restaurant is. We're listening for that's a little bit more down the block. With that being said, there's also a church there's a convenience store, a barbershop, a hair salon. There's a variety of commercial businesses where I can't see our business. We don't want added to outside people parking in the parking lot.  I mean what I can do is I could emphasize that our clients should not park where we located 12 of teenagers but that's not even I guess close walking distance to our business. I don't think my customers will affect that but I can't put an emphasis as to people not to I at to hear about buildings across the street from you.  What building is it? It's the zone. Oh okay.  I gotcha. Gotcha. That's a little bit more towards the left side that directly crosses Seven-Eleven in Church Park.  Thank you.  Other questions from the board . Can you just talk about trash or rodent control? You know what kind of layout that you do to address those kinds of issues?  I mean one of our trash we have everything in barrels not only that but we have our monthly well, I guess exterminator coming by to make sure that he puts down the traps and does the proper procedures. However, with the rodents that's a no issue with been Hyde Park in general it's not us specifically but it's a known thing in Hyde Park to have I guess an influx of rodents.  We're doing our job to kind of maintain outside of our premises but we can't really control the entire neighborhood and we can't drum up major with the rat incident and works out to talk to our liaison about that. I've sat in many meetings where I was brought up in the community. So it's a community where I think that they're planning to kind of address it so like I said, I'm all in favor of supporting the eight problem but till then some of this is beyond my control as far as like or other support hearing is there a motion make a motion to approve?  Is there a second second Mr. Stembridge?  Yes, we grew up Mr. Valencia. Yes. And as we well yes. Do yes, Mr. Mayor. Yes, Mr. Langham. Yes. Yes, Chair votes yes. The motion carries that locks. Thank you.  There we have two companion cases of Morikawa from the mayor's office and our first we have case VOA one six six nine one five the one fifty five on board Avenue along with that we have case VOA one six six nine seven one one with the address of one fifty seven but that is the applicant and the reviewer is the morning Madam Chair members of the board my name is Andrew Balasingham attorney at Gulson and Stores Business Address one post office square Boston Mass. Presenting this morning on behalf of the committee that Development Corporation and the Pleasant Hill Missionary Baptist Church there the accounts for one fifty seven Humboldt sixty for a while back street and one fifty five Humboldt have so just to go through how we are going to go about the presentation today we're going to start with Diane Clark who is the West director of Real Estate Development is going to give us background on the project and sort of the context of the partnership the church Hayley Hardwick Whitman from our architectural team at CO everything will then present the actual schematics of the project and then will kick back to myself to finish up and describe the relief invariants is being sought. So to start I want to pass it to Diane Clark to give us some background on the project and great. Thank you Andrew. Hello madam Chair in board again. My name is Diane Clark. I served as the director of Real Estate Development at Envestra CDC and based on the alignment of Pleasant Pleasant Hill Baptist churches mission and vision for bringing lasting positive benefit to the community and Ultrasuede founding mission of Affordable Housing Development Organization have partnered to develop the Nehemiah Development Project in Dorchester.  We thank you for the opportunity to present this important housing project to you today. I should mention that Reverend Colpeper would be here today but is attending a funeral this morning and could not join today's meeting. The Nehemiah Development Project is located at one fifty seven humbled and sixty four Lambeck Street in Dorchester two adjacent parcels that are owned by Pleasant Hill Baptist Church, the existing building at one fifty seven sold out is has been vacant since its last use as a retirement home in the late 1980s and sixty four long back street has been a vacant parcel since the early 1980s.  Pleasant Hill Baptist Church acquired these sites in nineteen eighty nine in nineteen ninety respectively and is also the owner of the abutting site of one by Tumbledown that houses its church that's housed its church since nineteen thirty nine the Nehemiah Development Team has developed a feasible program for the revitalization of one fifty seven hundred and sixty four Bombeck Street.  That program will bring twenty six units of affordable rental housing and amenities such as a community room laundry area seven off street parking spaces as well as access to meatiest forty four humble bus route that transports riders to the Orange Line to Jackson Square and rubble's station wagon square to downtown Boston in other points of the city and state through various public transportation connections. The long term vacancy of this site and the critical need for affordable housing in the city of Boston and this neighborhood makes an immediate development, a necessary project and a significant benefit to a community. We ask for your approval of this project. I now turn it to our project architect Hayley Hogwood Whitman of course everything to discuss the project design more detail. >> Hi everyone. Thanks Diane.  Could you please advance the slides to the park and slide?  So I think the next one is a development overview that Diane just ran through that shows kind of a bird's eye view of the site and the start of the project and then the next slide is the existing site . It's on the left as the existing structure, the condemned building that's going to be demolished and the corner a lot is one fifty five Humboldt Street on the right and then the next slide is the proposed plan.  Perfect. Thank you. So this is the proposed plan that shows the combined lots of 157 Avenue and sixty four Wall Street that form an L shape so the existing property line that divides the corner a lot of one fifty five Humboldt Street which is a lot better design is shown in red and we're proposing to move it to the yellow dash line to maintain this between the buildings. This plan also shows the existing abandoned building on the site that was just shown in the previous slide to be demolished and the extent of the gray shaded area it shows the proposed redevelopment to keep the building in the existing building footprint. >> Next slide please.  So this is the architectural site plan which shows that challenging a lot that we are working with and so a lot wraps around the one fifty five Humboldt Street which has the corner a lot with the church on it and the shape of this line largely dictated the layout while we maintained the apartments, egress routes and while still providing accessible entrances to both the residential apartments as well as the community room. Wall Street next slide please.  So this is the basement the basement but with seven off street parking spaces two of which will have electric vehicle charging stations the shared laundry for the residential apartments above and bike storage for all twenty six apartments then the drive aisle is in the top right corner which is access off of Bombeck Street because of the less a less busy less trafficked street rather than next slide please.  The main residential entry to the lobby is located off of Humboldt Avenue of shown in pink so there's more stories and in general the one bedrooms are shaded in yellow. The two bedrooms are in blue and the three bedrooms are shaded an orange with a total mix of seven one bedroom units ,fifteen two bedroom units and four three bedroom units.  And next slide please.  So all the humbling is four stories and the womp womp wing is two stories to better fit into the scale of the neighborhood. >> Next slide to levels two and three or sorry level three.  This shows the wombat wing roof because that volume is only two stories. Next slide please.  And finally finally level four shows how the fourth floor steps back from Humboldt Street to help reduce amassing the building next slide Ms.  This just shows the neighborhood context that we tried to draw inspiration from the existing rooflines. We're also planning on having flat mansard roof to accommodate future solar panels. >> Exline architectural elevation's which also include the the Pleasant Hill Missionary Baptist Church shaded in to show how it'll be masking part of the four story building next slide.  And finally this hour, Perspective's this is looking from Humboldt's Street towards the church and next slide and this is looking from the corner. I'm looking towards Wall Street and towards the community room entrance and finally I just want to mention that this building will be built to pass the standards and we'll have electric systems and I'll pass to enter exactly. So as mentioned before, this project is coming in under the auspices of the article Eighty Small Project you as such there's been extensive community process and numerous meetings with the community dating back to March twenty twenty three we've met with and received the assistance numerous electives including China, Thailand and Russell.  We've also met with the Mayor's Office of Neighborhood Services and the US and try to try our neighborhood association in order to allay any concerns the project with respect to the relief being requested.  These are companion cases because the church is contributing more land from one fifty five hundred ave to the project. What one fifty seven HUMBOLDT'S in order to reconfigure the wants to provide multi-family housing the community uses we are proposing one fifty seven point sixty four WABAC actually wrap around and fifty five Humboldt so the churches rewarding is aimed to address the restricted lot area available to us on this project the relighting of the churches Lord the necessity some dimension of relief for far and where you are but ultimately no changes to the existing improvements in the property are proposed this time for the Project Lot which is again located one fifty seven point sixty four Rhomberg a number of variances located due to the unique shape and L shaped configuration of the project forward as we went through in our narrative's the appellant's stretch it in the what area available because the property isn't exactly rectangular it sort of wraps around five have so we're looking for relief with respect to uses including community use and multifamily dwelling dimensional release is going to be implicated with respect to what are height and yards off street parking or loading and open space as a project team we strive to balance meeting as many of the requirements as possible while still trying to provide feasible and robust residential program. Ultimately the configuration we've come up with is going to provide substantial benefits to the community including equally affordable housing, community space and also while improving and underutilized parcel. So absent these variances we would not be able to proceed in a feasible fashion.  So we really think this will be a boon for the neighborhood and we ask for your support and will defer to the board to take any questions at this time. Thank you.  Thank you. Questions from the board here in public testimony District seven my name is Angioma because I'm the District seven office. Can you hear me all right?  >> Yes, ma'am. Great. Thank you so I am going to read a letter requesting to follow the councilor it says to whom it may concern I'm writing you regarding your age 15 thirty seven forty seven for the property located sorry one or is it OK?  Well the one we're talking about now one six six nine seven one five I just I'm fifty five HUMBOLDT'S requesting oh oh is that Kyle sorry I don't think I'm able to read due to community feedback we're kindly asking that this matter be deferred to allow for more time in the community review process. Several community members have expressed concerns about the treatment of tenants other their properties issues such as lack of hot water, non functioning community security cameras, safety concerns and doors that do not lock property allowing access for non tenants and this is caused significant distress to many residents. These ongoing maintenance challenges have led to a sense of frustration among tenants and until these issues are addressed, the community shows little confidence but a new development will be properly managed and so it's being requested that until this current situation with the existing properties are resolved or that the current challenges with existing properties are resolved for before moving forward with new projects, the councilor hopes that you will consider deferring this matter to ensure that existing tenants concerns are addressed first.  >> Thank you Chairman. Members of the board continue Newman with the mayor's Office of Neighborhood Services, the mayor's office to defer to the judge from this board some back information the community process as you heard from our construction station, they went through a community process for small project review involving a public meeting on March 7th,  eventually getting board approval in June the same they met with the Garrison Trotter Neighborhood Association several times, you know, going back and forth and kind of presenting their plans.  I understand that the gastrocnemius Association had written a conditional letter of support back in September of twenty twenty three. We did receive a letter from the sorry the Crawford Howland's Ruthanne would know what Impact Block Association seeking a deferral for this project expressing concerns with the management group and antisocial behavior that's occurred at other properties that they are our office stated will defer to the board at this time. Thank you.  I have one more rescanned Madam Chair.  Yes you did.  Yes thank you. Can you hear me? Yes I can hear you. Thank you. Good morning Madam Chair. Members of the board my name is Camille Platt and the project manager for the Plan Department for the one fifty seven Humboldt Avenue project as Mr Newman mentioned the project team HOSEK one article eighty meeting on March 7th this year that was very well attended. The project was subsequently approved by our BP board on June 13th of twenty twenty four . >> The plan department refers to the board on their decision. Thank you Nyanza in hand is up to well she's probably the applicant team if there are no other no other reasons not you then I'll refer it back to the applicant to respond briefly to some of these comments. I think I saw someone in the chat a memo that wanted to speak the yeah unmuted Antonio Antonio.  Yes. Can hear me. Good morning. Yes, good morning. My name is Antonio.  I'm a senior housing development officer with the mayor's Office of Housing.  This project involves the disposition of city owned land and which has been working with the development team since the tentative designation of these sites. The project does have the support of the mayor's office of Housing but of course we defer to the board on the decision. Thank you.  Thank you.  No other reason Madam Chair. Thanks for him. Please.  Hi this is Damian Clark from New Astra.  Am I able to speak now? Yes, please.  Oh all right. Thank you. I'd like to respond to two things first the most recent comment from from Antonio. I'd like to clarify that these these sites one fifty seven humble and sixty for one are owned by the pleasant church in private we own so I'm not sure if you heard about the building. OK, all right. Thank.  And in response to to the councilors offices of Concerned ,I'd like to say that the CDC is working very closely with our management company to resolve some of the issues that that we've been experiencing and a couple of our properties one one being the Dartmouth Hotel and in Union Square. So we are working very closely. We are aware of and working very closely with our management company to make sure that these matters are resolved and that they're not they're not recurring. So we have a strong level of attention to these matters and we'll follow up with the counselor's office to provide an update on the status.  Thank you. Any other questions from the board hearing?  None. Is there a motion I think this is a good project creating twenty six affordable housing units for rental and I invite the proponent to keep working with the community to to solve or fix any issues that they may have in the neighborhood.  But with that I think the project is a good project that will really create most new housing and hopefully create a community in the local area so we don't make a motion of capital. What is there a second Mr Stembridge?  Mr Valencia? Yes, Missoula yes.  Mr Panaro yes to Collins?  Yes. Mr Lynham yes. Shareholders yes. The motion carries good luck. Thank much.  There we have one six seven to nine for the address thirty one vacant street if the applicant or their representative of the support Madam Chair Member s step away.  My name is Adam Silver. I'm here with my client and no one ever asked anyone at St. We are here before you seeking for Sony Overbey.  I tell you when they had street we have some many on Gearheads Street is a existing tree family.  We are a First-Floor is excessive is first and the ground floor as one unit my client has a problem with renting such a large space and would like very much to split the ground floor from the first floor and confirmed the ground floor into its own. If we could please calm down calm down Gagetown.  I like to show the floor glass . Can you hear what you want to go down OK?  Yes go down no more please.  OK here is ok Poppo the ground floor if we see here the first floor we would be calling the wall separating the first floor from the ground floor if we go back up please.  OK, this is the existing existing ground floor as you see we have a family room to bedrooms and we have the other two bedrooms to the bedrooms upstairs so is pretty large. So the objective of my clients is to separate these two floors and make another unit go back down. Please.  OK, you see on the rendering of the ground floor we would be introducing a new kitchen family room and a two bedroom on the ground floor. We are de windows.  It's actually has a window out and a good portion the windows on the bedrooms is great. We did not light coming through death so go back down one please step OK so exists now Steve this is the first floor so the existing first floor we will continue to be two bedroom apartment the kitchen and the living is the another page down below.  Oh OK. Proposed as you see. OK I'll go back ok that's the same that's the proposed first floor go back down go down one on one ok it's ok this is the existing second and third so what's your question is just the first floor and we would like to split to those two floors to one unit in two units make it by creating one more new unit for my client to be able to write the FSA unit because she finds it difficult writing such a big apartment and we would like to support oh yes. So if you have a question I'll be glad to answer it. You could from the House floor to ceiling height in the basement oh that is seven six OK any questions from the board and you'd explain why doing relief requesting the song release we have off street parking says insufficient use for the area sufficient floor area ratio excessive and these are existing non conforming uses performing existing throughout that area of the questions from the board public testimony.  Madam Chair, members of the board for the record my name is Jeremy Bambury and Jamaica Plain community engagement specialist for the Office of Neighborhood Services applicant has completed the community process which consisted of important meeting on June 25th and very lightly attended with only one comment to bring awareness to the ability for the general area to look as the ground floor is at basement level. I know opposition was voiced during the meeting. Next up, proponent of the Jamaica Plain Neighborhood Council they were approved to move forward. I thank you for your time in the mayor's Office of Neighborhood Services.  I'd like to defer to the vote but they thank you.  I don't see any additional reasons. Madam Chair, may I have a motion not only motion I thank you. I make a motion to approve take on Mr Pembridge. Yeah.  Mr Valencia. Yes Zwier well yes it's Canaro. Yes Mr Collins.  Yes Mr Langham yes. Camarones yes.  The motion carries chair are a member of the board. >> You all have a great day. Thank you.  Next we KVOA one five three seven one up with the address of eighty five pleasant apple if the Apple or the representative of our president reasons why we case for yes good morning Madam Chair. Members of the board attorney Manacle with pleasure Chilton the business address of one Franklin Street on behalf of the applicant.  With me this morning is Tania Carrier from Kudzai Architecture.  Excuse me we are before you this morning seeking to renovate the existing structure and a Rear Edition for a total of five home ownership units and five parking spaces. The subdistrict is a three four thousand and our large size is one of the larger lots in the neighborhood at just under eleven thousand square feet. The existing structure is in need of repair. However, the main portion of this building does have historical value and the proposal includes renovating and restoring this portion of the structure while erecting a new rear addition to replace the current existing rear extension we're proposing this addition to carry the existing roof line and design of the building and we'll maintain the rear set back and actually pull off the right side lot that a lot of time to be zoning compliant on the side yard setback overall as I mentioned there are five proposed units but to two bedroom units and three three bedroom units with an average size of approximately six six hundred square feet.  Unit one and two will be located in the portion of the structure which will be preserved with unit one being on the first floor and Unit two being on the second and third floor units three three five will be located in the proposed new addition there'll be tri level units each containing three bedrooms as well as a recessed deck. As mentioned, the project has five parking spaces so we are meeting the zoning requirement of one to one parking and we're proposed parking areas and walkways as permeable to improve water run off this lot as you can see here on the plain in front of you is extremely deep.  It's almost two hundred feet deep. You can see our butter still left are made up of a number of three families. But between those five what's this fifteen units in essentially the same footprint as our lot size which is how we get our density. We do comply with all dimensional regulations including parking and open space as well as side effects are only zoning relief requested is the use Mafa the five units again is a 3F district but it's a three to four thousand district and again we have ten thousand nine hundred and seventy three square feet.  We are including a full landscaping plan and we're maintaining that existing set back of approximately sixty five feet.  So we're keeping away from all the Buttars as well as creating a natural buffer zone and landscaping improvements around the perimeter of a lot.  This project will allow the preservation of historic characteristics of the front portion of the building but also allow for energy efficient renovation and new safety features such as a sprinkler system for the existing building as well as the proposed new additions.  We did have an extensive community process going back almost a year and a half and numerous changes were made to this proposal which included reducing the unit count from eight to five. We also had a reduction in overall square footage numerous design changes. We originally came in with a more modern Rear Edition and we've changed that to be more in line with the current building and current nature and characteristics of the neighborhood. We also increased open space backs and as mentioned landscaping. We did some add two letters of support and received a favorable recommendation from the planning department based on our final submission to the board. But with that I was and take any questions the board may have. Thank you questions on the board hearing on public testimony. Madam Chairman, members of the board for the record my name is me Bambury and rasberry communications specialist with Office Services. The applicant has completed the community process which consisted of this meeting happened on June 5th at which time residents voiced their opposition regarding the density of the neighborhood such a large project they did state that the size of the project removes the open space . The concern for traffic increased not enough parking as well as a rat infestation issue that needs to be addressed.  Statements were also made that the owner does not live in the neighborhood.  Claims are made that the owner does but does not they feel it is unfair for nonresidents to come in and make large changes to any one they met with Mount Pleasant in person by association with this was opposed to the project the the project with five units. They were under the impression that the project was meant to be five units and that they would be sticking to the ordinance as mentioned they also say that the project is too large at five minutes and may set precedence further adding to an already overcrowded neighborhood.  I hope they do go on to say that they would support no more than four units. The group was did make a request or statement that they would have liked to see the proponent for today for their project. We have received no letters of opposition at this time. Thank time the mayor's Office of Neighborhood Services Collective Vision thank this year seven I think this is Anji on behalf of the District seven office comes to understand I'm going to be reading a request for deferral, the letter reads to whom it may concern I am writing you regarding your age fifteen three seven zero four seven for the property located at eighty five percent of due to insufficient notice time we are kindly requesting that this matter be deferred to allow for more time in the community review process residence in the area have expressed an interest in obtaining a little bit more information on this proposal before a decision is made or as was noted, the community is crucial to ensure that those with a longer history of the neighborhood have an opportunity to provide feedback to ensure that the project aligns with the needs and goals of the community with additional time the community hopes to be able to provide more thoughtful input.  The council hopes that you will consider deferring this matter to allow for a more collaborative process. Thank you.  Thank you.  Good morning Madam Chair and other distinguished members.  My name is called to the School. I'm going to director but I have lived in Roxbury.  I was born here and I lived here for fifty years so I come to speaking out of experience.  I have seen a lot of changes in Roxbury and this is not a positive one. Our neighborhood is becoming a way to jantz the construction AM a pleasant avenue alone within the past couple of years is overwhelming.  This particular project is way too many units it serves nobody except the owner who lives in Newton and the developer.  I cannot see anything positive about it. It's taking away green space which Roxbury is needs desperately along with trees and I think it's just going to increase the carbon footprint.  This is the second time a developer has come to us and the first one just walked away because they had too many opposition from the neighborhood and this doesn't help the neighborhood at all. No, my neighbors so I'm just reiterating what the letter was stated to you earlier very just do not see anything positive about it.  >> Thank you.  Good morning. I would like to read the letter into the record the fall if not then somebody from the board can read the remainder dear board members it was rumored in the community approximately three weeks ago that this agenda item below a fifteen thirty seven zero four seven proposal may come before the Ziba on December 10, 2024 for the December twenty twenty four Ziba meeting was finally posted on Friday morning December six two thousand twenty four just two point one business days notice prior to the meeting. So we have a request we have to request one.  It was it decided by the city of Boston that the proposal would be heard by the ZIBA on December 10, 2021 to the second request Kansas City mail all electronic written correspondence with the proponent including time date stamps with the proponent investor and and their representatives detailing the scheduling of the proposal coming before the Ziba on December 10th twenty twenty four. So the community issues with this proposal point one a this investor was informed that the community fully supports housing units on the parcel associated with the proposal despite it being zoned as a single family b This investor was granted that support despite one offering hardship explanation for their request to construct multiple housing units on this parcel and to offering no defined specific and tangible benefits for the community.  See this investor is now trying to ram five unit proposals down the community in spite of the community's goodwill point to this investor was made aware of several issues of great significance as to reasons this community and this neighborhood are faced with unique challenges in terms of zoning for multiple housing units and the addition of increase motor vehicle traffic a more pleasant avenue is one is a one way street in this section and cars constantly use this one way section in the wrong direction. The city is well where this year has taken no substantive remedial action to date to adding more units and more vehicles only exasperate this issue. Three residents are considering a legal action against the city on this issue and would include any city approvals for this proposal as part of that action . B There is also substantive substantial non resident vehicle traffic to current multifamily absentee landlords owned properties. I'm Pleasant Avenue.  This is due mainly to non-compliant numbers of occupants living in their buildings and c drug sales and use point three there is a major rat MIT raccoon saturation on my pleasant avenue. The city is aware of this.  The city has made sporadic prevention efforts including ticketing landlords, property owners, violating ISP regulation on trash containers etc. This is because someone from the landlord please read the rest of the letter into the thing we have a fall letter. I have it right in front of me. So if there's any other highlights from it you want to share please do otherwise just go. Do you have additional reasons you have more respect.  Can you please add new information as to why you're in support or opposition?  >> Hello my name is Holly Shepherd. I represent a Roxbury neighborhood council which is supporting the neighborhood in reviewing this this proposal and offering our request for a deferral their neighborhood in Good Faith has agreed to a four unit building and this non resident builder who has come to the table is is offering something that is beyond the neighborhood scope.  What we have John, against such a request that we try I won't take your time. I'm just a saying the same things. I'm a direct butter and don't even address three sixty to Mount Auburn Street.  I'm directly behind the new new property.  This just over the area is already overwhelmed with new construction and new traffic and new rats. It's just too much.  >> Please please don't don't anymore. Thank you. I can be applicant respond to various concerns that were raised to our manager. I'd be happy to.  Obviously a number of the concerns do seem to be kind of neighborhood wide concerns.  However there were several mentions of the non resident applicant.  I would just point out that the owner and development is the owner of the property. Past applications have come before this community as as speculative developers the my client owns the property. They may not live there but they own the property obviously have a right to propose a development they have cleaned up the property since they took it over both in terms of landscaping as well as repairs to the structure to make it habitable at least in the short term. The property was inspected by inspection services and deemed obviously in good enough condition to rent out. So action has already been taken to improve the conditions . As soon as we were made aware of the significant RAC infestation among the community at large, my client took steps to hire pest control and contribute positively to limiting that. However, comments were made that it's not even this property its other properties that don't really manage their trash well enough.  That's an ongoing issue. So this project does include a trash enclosure and obviously continued pest control measures will be taken in terms of the size again we started out proposing eight units.  We are now proposing five units. It is a three F district but I would point out there are 15 units across the street and fifteen directly to the left of us over similar sized lofts. There are also numerous multifamily buildings along Mt. Pleasant as well as Irvine and Winthrop Street so it is not an uncommon use as noted in the planning department's recommendation of approval.  This is also within the Roxbury Strategic Master Plan which is pushing for certain types of housing like this which can accommodate larger family style units. And again we're proposing to two bedrooms and three three bedrooms again the size of the lot the green space that we're providing. There was a comment about reducing green space.  We're actually keeping the building footprint relatively the same in the rear and actually removing a lot of the invasive overrun species and providing a whole new landscaping plan as well as permeable surfaces to help with over environmental issues as well as making the building safer with a sprinkler system and energy efficiency which which it lacks now currently the extension in the rear was built in piecemeal and quite honestly needs a lot of repair so that we think we have worked diligently with the community.  We had two of our meetings. We met with the Mt. Pleasant Forest and Vine Associate twice and offered to go back again. But we're told they really didn't want to speak with us unless we were going to four. And at this point with the historic renovation that needs to go into this project five was available and we think appropriately dense project.  >> How can you confirm you said there other multifamily is what are the number number of units ? So we range from apartment buildings. There's two apartment buildings on Vine Street which are listed on the assessors as seven to thirty units.  There are apartment buildings down on Mount Pleasant at thirty five thirty nine and forty three Mount Pleasant and we have a property directly across the street about two thousand square feet which is listed as a four or six unit. There's also a number of multifamily residential uses I believe nine units along Winthrop's which is our abutting street in the rear. Thank you Mr. Hampton, are you available to weigh in with the recommendation?  Sure, Madam Chair, city of Boston playing arborists.  We recommended approval. I don't know what else to say about that. I all right. Any other questions from the board hearing?  None is there emotion MAMCHUR I'm I'll put forward a motion of approval given that the new construction complies with the dimensional zoning regulations and you know, they're only asking for an additional two units which is an incremental increase and I think something the city is supportive of and wants to encourage moving for approval.  Their second goal second, you know, frankly rarely see projects with the no dimentia relief saw it. So the fact the only relief they're seeking is this this use variance.  I want to second it as well.  Thank you, Mr. Stembridge. I know, OK, because here reference to the posting for this hearing being short of the post I think has to be done three weeks advance which this was done three weeks in advance and then that's that's the one . So I think there still needs to be some give me the engagement without a lead. I'm not sure but I'll vote no at this point. >> Madam Chairman, if I may not to interrupt but I don't believe there was anything unique about the posting.  This I believe was posted Thursday at every hearing is I don't know if there's anyone from the board who can who can speak to that but it was nothing done by us different than anything and I don't think the city did anything differently so I just want to be clear that it was posted as normal three weeks ago in the newspaper and it was posted on what you what you pay was posted online.  OK, thank you Mr. Orzio. Yes. Well yes.  Miss Panaro.  Yes. Mr. Collins. Yes. Mr. Langham. No.  The chair votes yes. The motion carries. Thank you, Madam Chair. Members of the board next we have VOA one six three two seven five seven with the address of five on the bottom of a e e if the captain or the representative of President would they please try.  Hi good morning. My name is Nicole Aflalo. I'm joined today by my husband Owens as well as our architect Eric Sarasin.  We've submitted for a permit to build a roof deck on five or nine E eight where we currently reside.  If you go to the next slide I'm sorry but we've done our part this year we're located between the H and I.  If we go keep going to the next slide.  This is an overview of so the rebuilt on the back side of the building which faces Columbia and it would be accessed via a staircase that is only accessible through our unit and there is no interior work to done on the next slide a view from the side of the building. So again this is on the backhand side.  The staircase would be built on an existing balcony off of our unit and would lead to the to and then just stay front and rear view and then I think there are just some additional views on the two sides below.  >> We're just confirming that that set back off the front, correct. It's it's on the back. It's the back side. Correct. Thank you.  I'm not for presentation. Thank you for the time.  Thank you. Are there questions from the board hearing then May public testimony Madam Chairman,  members of the board ciggie Godsmack the Office of Neighborhood Services this petitioner has completed the L.A. community process. Our office hosted an important meeting on October 4th at which one comment was made in support and done by the opposition petitioner coordinated with the gate of having neighborhood association which took a position of opposition as is their standing policy to oppose all reflection in their catchment area. That background we defer to the judgment of the board. >> Thank you.  I can assure me that's great. Good morning to members of the board Laura here for Coastal Affairs Office at this time council seem willing to non-recurring opposition counsel Quinn has a long standing opposition against the construction of due to the impact on quality of life for the neighborhood for many years South Boston has become a destination for young people on the weekends consistent complaints regarding loud parties are always international issues have steam from the presence of offtakes.  Members continue to report these issues including our seniors, those with disabilities and your family. >> Thank you as any other questions from the board?  May I have a motion motion approval back to you Mr. Stembridge. Yes, Mr. Valencia. Yes Mizue Well yes.  Miss Panaro. Yes, Mr. Collins.  Yes. Mr. Lynham. Yes. Chair votes yes the motion carries good luck. Thank you very much.  There we have gave away one six zero zero four eight six with the address of seven points if the applicant or their representative on the case the one seven now let's see I've got my hand raised. Come on muted yeah. You can take that.  We can hear you. So anyway we we are just looking for the same relief that we were granted a couple of years ago and that relief last while we fussed with our neighbor the school that got Satyal schools.  The school has agreed to not oppose what we're doing.  Is there any way that I can get you to to allow the architect and owner to talk to speak as well? Yeah, they can speak looks like I don't know what the heck are you having trouble downloading their presentation?  >> I'm going to make you a panelist. Yeah, So here we go.  Look, maybe I don't know if you want to continue presenting.  Well yeah I hope this doesn't change well, I've got to change one of the big civic association asked us years ago to do to change the real roofline which we did and we which the architect did and we resubmitted those plans with the change proof like and then our our relief last and now we're just looking for it to be reinstated.  Are there questions from the board?  Can we have public testimony,  Madam Chair, members of the board see Johnson with the office neighborhood services. This petition has completed though one community process Apple can represented this project was given approval for twenty twenty three which then lapsed due to lack of an extension community process was re completed this year. We hosted a Buttars meeting on August that which no concerns were raised. The Beaconhills Civic Association adopted a position of non opposition. With that background we defer to the judgment of the board. Thank you. Thank you Madam Chair. Members of the board Christian Simonelli Antibusing Autocross . So we have worked with the applicant on updating both letters the box water and sewer we approve letter had A 2013 B we asked them to go back to the commission for an update a letter they did that and we have an updated letter for twenty twenty four similarly to No Harm letter which was twenty twenty also need to be revised because they have a new engineer on board. That letter was revised and sent to us.  We had a little bit of back and forth on the comments but were able to get an updated no harm letter from the applicant as well. So we have both updated and most recent letters from the applicant. Thank you stands up with that man in motion.  I'll make them and the proviso the plans be stamped by postictal in March commission again as well as second second Mr Stembridge. Yes, Mr. Vonzell.  Yes as we well yes tomorrow.  Yes Mr. Collins. >> Yes. Esterline yes. Chair votes yes. The motion carries thank you. Good luck there we have one brief the XXXI with the ad of this very night Charles you have to contend with but only one.  Yes. Thank you Mr Stembridge. Madam Chairman, members of the board attorney Ryan Smith without his emergency business address of 168 H Street first floor South Boston joining me today is the owner and operator of the new proposed restaurant Hell's Kitchen Jason in the Locarno. This is a proposal seeking a ground floor change of use from a coin operated laundry mat to a restaurant take out the existing residential units above will remain.  The proposed scope of work will only include an interior fit out no exterior work to be performed. Halkett in concept as a farm to table dining featuring food directly sourced and responsibly prepared for will be directly sourced from New England farmers, growers and producers. This relationship benefits for all farmers, restaurants and the patrons.  Child Street is a busy street in Beacon Hill with many buildings consisting of ground floor restaurant and retail spaces with residential units above this area is regulated by the underlying zoning of Boston proper and a subdistrict of any age to sixty five where the restaurant use and takeout are used to the thirty seven and thirty six eight are forbidden which we are here today seeking relief. Also the additional zoning violation we did get cited for was insufficient parking. There is no feasible way of providing parking on this parcel. However this neighborhood is primarily serviced by public transit and last I want and on this proposal has already undergone approval from the licensing board of the city of Boston as well. At this point, Madam Chairman, to turn over to you for any questions or comments. Thank you.  I believe there were some concerns just about the use of Cedar Lane with trash debris. It's I don't know if you want to comment on that. Yeah, those are some of the concerns.  Again, I didn't represent them when they went to the license to care. They had a different licensing attorney representing them but the trash will be stored a. they'll be exterior removal and there won't be any sort of usage on on that way.  That's only for emergency egress as well. Thank you.  Questions from the board hearing of public testimony.  Madam Chair, members of the board ciggie Johnson at the Office of Neighborhood Services . This petition has completed the honors community process. Our office hosted and abiders meeting on February six of twenty twenty four. There were several reporters present the only concern raised related to Rowden activity.  The Beaconhills Civic Association has submitted a letter of opposition to the restaurant use at this location said letters should have been forwarded to the board, should be in the possession of the board. The reason cited for their opposition were additional trash and food waste exacerbating rodent problems increased congestion on the section of Charles Street which backs onto residential Cedar Lane way. With that background we defer to the judgment of the board. Thank you. Thank you.  Good morning Chairman. Members of the board once again Mirrlees Treatment Mr. City Council Sharon Durcan Councilor Jernigan would like to echo the community's concerns outlined in the association's letter.  Opposition proponent has not reached out to our office but we have heard from many residents of the neighborhood voicing their opposition to this application.  For this reason, Councilor urges the board to deny the request to zoning. Thank you at the Family Services offices.  Yes, good morning.  Joshua Lefler, chair of the Beacon also the Association representing a thirty seven River Street. I'd like to reiterate our opposition to the application proposed zoning relief specifically we are concerned about the applicants lack of prior business operations on Charles Street and their lack of experience in managing a restaurant particularly one serving beer or wine further as a neighborhood with twenty one food service establishments operating on the five blocks of Charles Street an additional establishment especially one offering takeout and insufficient remediation plan has a cumulative adverse impact on our neighborhood including but not limited to illegal parking rats, trash and noise to the residents above. >> Thank you. Thanks for the record we have no additional reason. Thank you. May I respond briefly briefly yes.  So Madam Chair, we did hear the concerns again this was completely vetted through the licensing department which gets scrutinized at the city of Austin's licensing board as well as the ABC which since then received approval. Mr McArdle has extensive experience in this industry here and again which seen fit again by the city of Austin approval from the licensing.  Thank you. Any questions from your board? Mamchur Trevor quick question. Hoping Mr Hampton can answer can you speak to the zoning for Charles Street? Is it all within the same zoning district and are all of the other restaurant within that district on Charles Street? >> Well thank you Madam Chair or Jeff Hampton City Boston Planning Charles Street is the quirky because if you were to look to zoning that would pull it up, pull it up outside zoning board the zoning district maps tend to go bisect some of the properties that front Charles Street so they are both a business and a residential zoning district. I believe this is more so on the opposite the hillside I believe see where five six of the most so I they can't get cited for policy forbidding use and an allowed use not cited for an allowed use but because as I mentioned the zoning is so old what these districts were drawn they do bisect a lot of the properties along Charles also Madam Chair, if I may one thing that's further I think it'll be beneficial added to the record is that at one point in time previously this was a restaurant space as well. Then it was converted over to I believe it might have been like at one point in time of vineyard vines. So it's been a very tough space to actually operate a small retail business and again esthetically very similar to the neighboring buildings that have restaurant commercial retail space along with residential above. Thank you. Any other questions on the board hearing then? Is there a motion was upside?  No, I will second that just to my question earlier there are several restaurant uses on Charles Street and I don't see why we should treat this one any differently. >> The zoning is Mr Stembridge. >> Yeah.  Mr Landsea. Yes, because we will yes. Yes.  >> Mr Collins. Yes. Mr Langham. Yes chair votes yes. The motion carries the book. Thank you.  Next we KVOA one six seven one five five three with the arrogance thirty one Massachusetts Avenue it's the Apple cantando they representing the president the the one thank you Mr Stembridge and yes Madam Chairman of the Board for your time this today my name is Kyle Smith of Citarella Business address of three five nine Newberry Street in Boston's Back Bay on the call with me as well of the two proposed owners of the property, the properties is contract purchased currently with the closing date coming up in this calendar month we have a preexisting commercial unit that has been set in a non utilized fashion for the past five years. It's been a source of contention in among this particular association we've had both a meeting we've had a meeting before the Back Bay Neighborhood Association.  We have support of the condominium importantly and also the the Back Bay and a lot of positive feedback from our Buttars. The proposals to take the current existing interior space with no structural change reconfigure it slightly to create a body establishment.  There are presently only a handful in the Back Bay. In total there's a permanent make up location, there's a tattoo removal location and then the board within about the past year approved a the Boston tattoo company for a tattoo parlor at 244 Newbury Street will be among a small number of like establishments in the back Bay.  The footprint of the commercial space is seven and square feet is what you're looking at here. There's proposed to be just interior nonstructural renovation for two effective tattoo reclining beds with the one owner on the call to be one of the primary tattoo artists who's been doing that previously. They'd like to make it kind of a high end concept type, you know, comfortable feel with a lot of elegant artwork. So this is just some proposed renderings of just some their design concepts but they would advertise local artists in those pieces of work would be available for sale. They've already sourced and have some artists in hand in mind for displaying their artwork. If you'd like to continue the first floor controls the rear of the building with off street parking which can satisfy probably conservate three vehicles, maybe more so parking is a non issue and also not a citation as you'll see by the later refusal letter.  Again, it's just some more graphic concept of what they'd like to do an implement as far as the displaying of their artwork.  If you like to continue this is our associate a refusal letter. We again have only seven eight square feet. We have at least three off street parking spaces.  We're undergoing no interior renovation work. We're cited solely for a use violation which is for that as a body are established.  And again this is very much looking forward to this particular establishment and a, you know, rejuvenator of the space which is sat vacant for five years. Again, the back Association of the Neighbor Association of the Back Bay has approved well not opposition. We do have a lot of support also from the local Buttars which are the later slides showing if you want to continue . So this year letters of support. But our support and I can certainly let Conrad here is the representative of NAB the last slide so critically again we have very large support from the highway and also the Back Bay Association for the Association of the Back Bay and other Buttars.  And with that again the owners are on the line of questions about their operation, their prior history of doing such type of body art and for general questions. And we can also let neighborhood services run through our level of community engagement and support.  Thank you. Are there questions from the board hearing that may public testimony? Madam Chair, members of the board also the Office of Neighborhood Services. This petition has completed the arts community process our office hosted on a Buttars meeting on November 6th which was well attended.  No high volume of comments were made in support of the proposal and the re occupancy of an unused space. The concerns raised primarily related to trash disposal and loitering neighborhood association.  The Back Bay is the active civic group in this area and they are in non opposition to the proposal. With that background we defer to the judgment of the board. Thank you.  Thank you.  But we have no way to come up with that motion a second Mr Stembridge.  Yes, Mr Valencia. Yes.  As we well yes. Mr Manado. Yes Mr Collins. Yes Mr Langen.  Yes it was yes. The motion carries.  Thank you very much. Appreciate your time.  Well we've been getting questions from our readers questions were there any passed time we'll ask if there are any requests or withdrawals or referrals from the eleven thirty.  Yes I went to my MP the eighty six storia there is only no treatment to the record. Thank you all for thank you sir. I want to Compartmentation first being Caitriona one five three eight six eight six the address of eighty six stories three and along with that eight vote one five case was also the address of the Would you go ahead sir. Good morning madam Chair and also the board. We were given a state in order to get a approval of our revised plans from the Treasury Department. We just received those plans this morning and also received the letter. I received a letter for the zoning indicated one last violation which is good.  However, this is a letter for the building building code had to previous violations. Those were eliminated and eliminated given the revised player, however, the revised plan also meant that we had to knew the violations upon is not as bad as in previous but there are two violations. What that means is we have to go out. We have to advertise the project again based on those two violations which means we need more time to get community involvement and approval and also the process again to come before you with the with the new violations or or or the building code. Thank you Caroline with HQ.  Yeah. I mean how much time do you think you need and then I can give you two days based on that one that's good.  Gosh everything seems to take a long time I would think given the going back to the neighborhood group which is probably or if we're lucky I'm thinking probably realistically speaking sometime in February he was large I will make to have time to get this done.  We could do February twenty fifth or March 11 March 11 is better. I think the longer the further back I think that's probably more acceptable.  I have a motion Muslim I until March 11 may 2nd Mr Stembridge. Yeah Mr Rentier yes this we well yes this Panaro yes Mr Collins yes Mr Lingham yes chair votes yes the motion carries. See you then. Thank you very much.  We to stand up. Yes thank you Mr Stembridge 80 G Street South Boston Police you in your case VOA one six three one seven six four with the address of any G Street go Transperth bouncier members of the board attorney Ryan without some arancini business address of one sixty eight street first floor sell Boston we're here seeking a deferral short deferral as we just received the revised stamps back yesterday with an update of refusal. We believe there are some inconsistencies with that refusal that was provided and also coupled with this this will allow the planning department to have a review of the updated plans where their first initial recommendation we believe that this new address, those issues spoken of during their recommendations.  So again, we're here to request a short deferral, OK with that airline we can do January twenty eight as reinforced February 25th or March 11 we'll take the twenty eighth place. OK with that may I have a motion motion to defer to January the twenty may I have a second second Mr Durbridge.  Yes Mr Rentier. Yes Mizue well yes Mr Fernado yes Mr Collins yes.  Mr Langham yes yes the motion carries you then. Thank you.  If there are no further request for your referral for this time friend we will return to the previous question well before eleven thirty we start off with case Boeing one six six two three five with the three of the 17 Street it's the applicant and they represent the president.  Please that's fine. Yes thank you Mr Stembridge.  Thank you Madam Chair. Members of the board attorney Jeff Dragovic Dragoman Ascott but the business address of eleven Beacon Street here on behalf of my client Fraizer Allen and we also have Adam classman on the call as needed . He was the architect on the project if we could pull up the presentation, Madam Ambassador . Great. Thank you. So as was mentioned, this is a townhouse proposal. It's to raise two existing structures on a twelve thousand two hundred and seventy three square foot lot. It's a vacant three family that sat idle for a while and then a two family where the owner was selling the property resides right now and so the particular district falls within a three to four thousand although around us surrounded around us on Liow Birmingham Highway across the street are multiuse family and larger apartment style and condo style complexes on the site. The proposal that you're looking at in this picture is a townhouse style use of three storey eight units of townhouse connected with one interior parking spot through access of an interior garage which you can see in this proposal. There's actually although many of the buildings around us are much higher in density down the street there's also a townhouse style complex and that's what folks in the immediate area wanted to see something a little different than the standard block building for this particular area of Brighton just to go over if you go to the next slide, Madam Ambassador, this gives you an idea of some of the context the area you can see the condo building at six Lincoln at fifty fifty six Leo Birmingham Highway Office Building on the corner the Waverly Complex across the street and so on and so forth directly behind us is a city park and ball field. So there is a lot of open space that can be used which is nice for the residents of the condo buildings if you go to the next slide please these are just existing conditions and you can see right now there's a shared easement driveway for the two buildings.  A particular driveway is thirty three feet in lands and what we're proposing is three separate curb cuts in the front of the building that would allow the car access for each individual townhouse.  Total square footage of our total length of those three driveways actually thirty feet so they're less in length than the existing curb cut curb cuts that housed the existing properties. Now and right now there's a large amount of hot tub in the front and in the back of the building we are actually going to create a I'll show you in a few slides a large area of green space about as well on this property. You can go to the next slide please.  >> And again, this is directly across the street.  So commercial use across from us in a parking lot facility.  Next slide please, Madam Ambassador.  And now we just get into the plans if you can go to the next slide, this will start getting into the floor plan so these are all exact design. So they're all seventeen hundred and thirty square foot units. They all have a rare gap with egress stair that seven foot three by six feet. The first floor is a one interior parking garage office and Abath if you go to the next slide please Madam Ambassador the second floor of all the units houses, kitchen, dining, living half bath and then the rear deck and then on the third floor to bed to bath with a small office up there for additional amenities space. So these are all two bedroom two baths seventeen eighteen hundred and thirty square foot unit for each one. If you go to the next slide please this just shows you sort of the entrance point with the green space all around in the back.  So again the back of our property abuts the park but our real set back is actually twenty feet little over twenty feet so twenty feet two inches to the actual buildings before the open air ducts we do create a large area of green space, some green trim on front as well. We went through pretty extensive community process meeting with the Baier to get their support as well as the amateurs who really welcomed the change in a town hall style project which was something different although and just in terms the zoning variance is needed, this is an Mafa proposal because at the units and this is a 3F district although we're surrounded by an Mafa so we would need to use various additional launch area FSR workflows point eight is allowed. We're at one point one are set back. We're twenty feet two inches to the building but forty would be required and then this particular project although it still needs it creates eight parking spaces one point seven five per unit would be required. But this does fall in line with the new Western half corps to study to reduce parking on new developments for this particular area.  With that I can pause and answer any any questions at the board. Ma'am, thank you. I'm sure if you start with my recommendation can you speak to current issues and save pedestrian access?  I'm sure so we actually reduce the curb cut from four to three and again this the the the plants have already been submitted. We would be happy and we looked at it to reduce the curb cut to two instead of three.  We can still make that function. The other point to note and I had mentioned earlier is that right now there are two existing curb cuts through a shared easement. Those actually are thirty three feet in length are three curb cuts are only thirty but we would be happy to reduce that to two if that would help the board would fit it look like the other comments were positive in terms of the actual development itself given the size and scope of the surrounding buildings.  Thank you. The questions from the board hearing no public testimony,  Madam Chair, are members of the board also with the Office of Neighborhood Services? This petition are completed and this community process our office hosted Buttars meeting on the 1st of October. The design was generally praised by abidance. One concern was expressed about the size of the curb cut of one of the curb cuts petitioners presented to both Charleston Civic Association and the Brighton Allston Improvement Association and they're both supportive of the proposal as presented with that background we defer to the judgment of the board. Thank you. Thank you, Rick.  Yes, we're house here speaking on behalf of the Mt. Vernon Company. We are directed butter for the Parcel at Leo Birmingham Parkway which is directly across Wall Street speaking with a couple of concerns first being the curb cuts that were just discussed the buildings are 20 feet from the property line and so functionally you're really not able to turn into these garages in twenty feet the turning radius of even a compact car would not be able to get into a couple of these garages.  So I don't feel that these curb cuts has shown are really going to functionally work.  Therefore they'll have to take more public street parking away to make these work or have garages that are never used for cars and then who knows what they'll be converted into my second thank you. My second concern is I will call your attention to the ground floor plans with the garages each unit shows an office on the ground floor, the rear of the building that can only be accessed from the rear of the building or through the garage. It cannot be accessed from the townhouse unit itself those quote unquote office spaces have a full bathroom or at least with a shower. So it's very easy to see how you can add a dorm fridge and a hot plate and rent these out a studio apartments. So I think that we are create we're allowing them to create sort of a de facto auxiliary unit in each of these townhouses which is a great concern for the neighborhood to have sort of unregulated apartment units like Madam Chair members of the board Antebellum's in the Brightness and Improvement Association. We'd like to go on record in support.  We do feel that we have a lot of buildings being built that are apartment style in the area and this is more is a long term residential living with private yard space for our family to grow. So this is the type of housing that we're missing and so we'd like to go on record in support. Thank you. No additional resistance.  Any other questions from the board?  Can the applicant talk about why they need an office with a shower stall?  Was it's just to utilize more space pinatas?  So again we try to keep these two bedroom units just based on what we had heard comments.  The office space really was a functional area down there so that if someone pulled into the garage there isn't multiple entrances to that. It's if you're working you pull in. There's a small office in the back and a small bathroom that you know, if you were working in your office you could use like a sink can sink and a half shower.  If the board wanted us to remove that, that's fine. There was no issue with it at all. And again, given what's around us, these buildings are all much this is smaller and this was a design that folks worked with us on on the curb cuts as was mentioned all of the driveway, all of the access point in the garage can fit a full size car in it. We purposely designed it for that and we also designed it to be interior parking to keep the car's lights from flashing and keep everything interior to the actual unit itself. All of the curb cuts and driveway access was reviewed by Inspection Services Department. We weren't cited for anything like turn radius or maneuverability. So all of this function in the eyes of ESD and met the code.  Thank you. The questions before hearing none is there a motion I'll make a motion to approve with the proviso that the BPA is special attention to the car of course and pedestrian access is there a second second Mr. Valencia? Yes, Mr. Stembridge. Yes. As well yes. >> I think that design reflects the request from the community and I think the two items Mr. Collins outlined can be improved upon with designer desperado.  Yes, Mr. Collins. Yes. Mr. Langham.  Yes Schierholz yes. The motion carries I don't oh but we need to go back to our seventy two tomorrow we need to apologize to the board and to the business but I skip one right from the ninth yet three that I'll get that back on track with the case Bayway one six six zero six three four with the address of three seventy two girls it's the applicant and they are present with it. Please explain to the boy good morning. >> Thank you Mr. Stembridge. Madam Chairman members of the board my name's Memex in New York's address of forty two people Street in Gloucester, Mass. Also joining us this morning is George and Tony, owner of three seventy two Monroe Street. If you could go to slide five,  I'll get started.  Thank you for some of your most recent existing 14 unit building. The proposal is to convert to four units in the lower left corner of the sheet. You'll see a very high rating in red that is requiring of the leaf the relief we requested in Article thirteen Section thirteen Dimension of regulations rear guard insufficient article thirty two Section four guard Applicability. We have received our approval letter for that part of the nineteen sixty four yards and each district are if you could go to the next slide this is our engineer plan.  Next slide please these are the existing laws plan on the sheet lower left corner of the area in question this is an existing alley the main body of the building is six storey brick with a three storey brick. We are now that lower left open area is thirty eight feet deep in thirty three feet in height this conditions creates kind of a dark area in the neighborhood and it just isn't nice. So if you go to the next slide or you actually coming in and out might be a bandwidth issue. I don't know if you want to go on camera real sharp. Yeah thanks.  Yeah. Next slide ten please.  Right on the water plan is our proposed garage as part of that proposed garage we are going to take up the alleyway and the existing three are set back for that is three point seven feet the most part of the out that high lower left corner is approximately four point seven two feet away including this existing alley space in what proposed garage area we're able to fit four cars and at the same time that at the next unit two we were able to create new attack. Next slide please.  We're creating a new three here . Keep going down the roof tackler.  Next slide please. These are the rear elevations as presented this morning projects already gone through the Back Bay Architectural Commission Review.  We have approval with provisos and then we worked with the neighborhood association ever whether you were out of the garage door or some nice Auriel windows on the right corner, you can see our new wall and new additions in the back. As I said, slightly different. The back is also highlighted in red.  Next slide please.  This is a section through the proposed addition of the alley as you can see there's a little bit of a roof there. We add there's an existing building which was hidden in the Boston area. So we propose to do that and we're able to gain approximately 60 square feet by pumping out at the lower level one level two area just gives us just a little bit more room and cleans up feasible. We the existing bay which was bisected by the existing wall and that should conclude my presentation at this time. Thank you. I no questions from the board hearing no public testimony. Madam Chair, members of the board ciggie Johnson the Office of Neighborhood Services this petitioner completed the online community process our office hosted and Buttars meeting on November six that we no concerns were raised. The Neighborhood Association of Backpage and Non Opposition to this proposal. With that background we defer to the judgment of the board. Thank question, Madam Chair, members of the board Simonelli both and Groundwater Trust and we have both key comments from the thank you. Thank you.  Good morning Madam Chairperson and members of the board. My name is Briana McCarthy.  I'm the attorney at Johnson and Bernstein and we represent Dr. Emma Wilhelm who is a unit owner in the Aberdeen condominium at three seventy Maribel's our only concern is regarding the fire escapes that connect both buildings.  We respectfully ask that the approval be conditioned on the implementation of the proposed fire escape option five plan dated November twenty first twenty twenty four to ensure the fire escape to stay connected to both buildings.  We have no additional incidents thank you. Or that can be apprehended.  That concern about fire escaped but yes 370 members which is to our right if you're facing the rear of the building they have existing fire escapes that come from their building across onto our property and we've been working with them to resolve that. But condition is a part and we've presented probably five or six alternatives for them to review and I agree with so we're working with them to resolve that issue and as part of our project thank you for that.  Thank you. Any questions from other questions from the board and may I have a motion I'll make a motion to approve with Boston Water and Sewer off and Landmarks Commission Sign-off a second Mr Stembridge yeah.  Mr. Valencia. Yes. Well yes Miss Panaro.  Yes. Mr. Collins. Yes. Mr. Langham yes. Schierholz yes.  The motion carries members on board mantrip Madam Chair are trying to jump ahead and come back to the right place of we have to we have an interpretation and a reconsideration case scheduled for noontime and I would just ask at this point if there are any request for withdrawals for the girls from either of those we'll be pursuing. Mr. Stanbridge, I'm sorry I should just clarify we're proceeding on both.  Thank you. Thank you very well with that that we will return to be the the last of the nine thirty days DVOA one six three nine five eight four with the address of one forty nine to one fifty one street is the African and the will be represented by President will they please explain things and raise your hands. Oh can you hear. Yeah God everyone my name is that is the one we want you can I am the new owner of Scientists Road Taxin located on one four nine two one five one Pearl Street so I am here today to obtain a new TV license and I meet to remove the current proviso and my name in order to proceed to the next step which is the inspection in inspection to get the gold seal so I could have that last piece of document to to apply for the new code license requirements no more hearing than public testimony that afternoon. Madam Chairman, what my name is David Jones representing the medievalist neighborhood services regarding one forty nine to one fifty one Pearl Street office will defer to the board's judgment on this matter due to the existing use of this space as a restaurant we did not require the applicant having a Buttars meeting though we did encourage them to meet with the Wharf District Neighborhood Council which convened on ten fifteen twenty four. The association has expressed support regarding the proposal and they have also provided a letter of support for the applicant at this time the mayor's office and neighborhood services refers to the board's judgment on this decision. Thank you everyone for your time consideration.  Former chairman of the board this office based on because I would like to support this but thank you. We have no exams with that man. I have a motion motion to approve the second can Mr. Stembridge. Yes. Valencia yes.  Yes we will.  Yes. Minato yes. Yes.  Mr. Collins. Yes. Mr Latham. Yes, yes. Motion carries thank you.  Next we have a viewer one six one one eight two one with your address through Wall Street if the Apple Android is a little we're going to try to everyone awaya good.  Please state your name and address for the record. Yes, my name is obviously Suza. I'm a general contractor representing one of these round Baldwin who was on the Cherokee Street in East Boston, Massachusetts.  I'm with the Boston contractors and the contractor is driving out to rubberstamp anything on this.  Interesting. You see OK, so I'll tell you what we've so this is a pseudo family so to put their single family home, Mr. Maquila, his wife could be leaving on this house to be promptly is beyond either beyond the two rooms and also the four next door. So what are we trying to do over is Brook Street is right on the corner with look at my map. I've got a quick this right on the corner with just stacked up with a Brooks house brimming brimming straight round the corner.  But we haven't had a back surgery.  He's he's he's retiring. He's at home.  It doesn't really well his mobility is very stable.  Why don't we try to do yeah he does have a two car garage.  Is this going to have our eyes on his house right now only has a single car garage. Sure. What are we trying to do is where the double garage a 14 foot garage door to his DNA garage. So you have access to Houston.  He's going to be able to work both cars on either under the house him and his wife. But you order to do this, we are going to have to eliminate the mean answers to the door,  to the house, to the house and house right now has to mean big glass house. Welcome to the front row of a brutal street which is where you can look at those plants as a way to bring to the front door again the last in order for me to do what you can, I am going to have to delete that the wall that divided.  So he's used new Primanti Amenabar address is going to be towards the back door which is the district level. This house does not have a basement is they street level on Bremen Street.  They are going to become the main entrance now in the door if you go to the next beat down the proposed issues when the new guys are going to be cheese, we are also going to keep the door to the we're going to keep the door to the to the to the the garage is just not going to be the mean and the entrance anymore the main entrance anymore. So the main entrance is on begin remonstrate. It's going to be several miles south and southeast you think are we going to do is eliminate the wall in the garage to able to fit cars and put a bigger one?  He's going to have to oximetry the progress of the house.  So that's an advance we're looking for assistance from the board have Elevation's so we have a plan doesn't it? I don't think it doesn't have them on this plan. So I mean look at the plans that I have.  See if I can have something. I see three pages but this is all we have.  So let me screen let's see if I have that. I don't know I don't I don't I thought I have something that shows innovation but it's very true if you look at yeah.  That's the only one I have unfortunately that's how House that's the only one I have unfortunately. But there is this lawyers take that entrance through a garage is no longer your main entrance prior to secondary twice as far as I can get.  Well we should have a thought that though we were just going to be the second movie risk was second is location through the garage but the first aggressor is going to be a street which is a separate law is there is this here is this this thing which is if you look what does that does anyone from the Deepdale know Mr. Hamdan are gone? Yeah, we don't touch building code.  There you have it Mr. I don't even understand the violations on this one.  It's a I'll tell I'll tell you what it is what they told me Bossom just the zoning violations. Can you just explain those? Yeah. There is a letter that was submitted to Mars if you look and I believe the middle of the matter should be attacks but it is like I have a copy right here everyone is on the agenda. This is the building code issue only there is no zoning. >> Yeah. Oh OK. So this is building on Mr. Collins, can you elaborate maybe on your end? I mean I just I'm I don't think we can grant building code release. Right. That's needs to be done by I honestly I'm not comfortable Brantingham Really if this needs are met I think we can but whether we will or should. Yeah the things I did submit the application to year and I got denied two I have the copy allow me this is protamine child was required to travel to a garage but what I'm trying this is not going to be can become the bramble's remind me of my regrets.  What I want to do this is going to become the secondary of the problem probably MG will be if you look at the far back on the top that's the door there on the to reach street so that's going to become a first class right breakdown no no construction delacourt is already so this is no longer being used in the garage and you're just using as a like a secondary egress dahlby So the garage is not used as a garage. What I need to do is install a bigger door garage door. This will be almost which is elderly's 71 years old with his wife with problem with surgery. He wants to be able to park his house both cost and we do have the room for our needs to put a bigger door. So for him to come in and out his wife, that's all I'm asking. So we wanted to do this. I need to make the bed go on to become the main house. We just like it. It's already there. The construction needs for OK thank you. Can I is public testimony it doesn't sound too because it's not a zoning case. Yeah and just disconfirming nobody's hands nobody seems at the moment Madam Chair thank you. OK well are there any other questions from the board. If not can I have a motion.  >> Mamchur I'm no further questions.  I'll make a motion of denial you know they're looking to add a second car which would eliminate that primary means of egress that they have right now. I understand they have to means but I'm also looking at Google Maps on this and it looks like this property is located very close to an intersection. So I I don't think they should be able to add more vehicular access so close to that intersection and not comfortable with the building code or at least that's being requested.  All due respect is there we're the serving is already one I don't know what we're voting now.  OK, is there a second OK, Mr. Stanbridge.  No, I based on what he says about the gentleman, I think it's good. I'll leave it there, Mr. Valencia and he with that they say I bought no as we well yes to the denial Miss Panaro I vote yes in denial. I don't think we should be granting building code relief. Mr. Collins.  Yes, Mr. Langham.  Yes, The chair votes no. The motion does not carry. Is there another motion I'm thinking I'm not sure if we get the leprechaun to go back to I is the angel figuring it out?  What kind of clandestine needs do you want to put forward emotional deferrable? I motion for reference yeah. So is there a second second that Mr. Stembridge. Yes Mr. Lawrence here.  Yes Mizue well yes Miss Canaro yes Mr. Collins.  Yes. Mr. Langham. Yes votes yes the motion carries Caroline is there a date we can do a very separate court or at the very Twyford does that work for the applicant?  It does yes please. Which one so we can confirm the first the first ballot the earlier the about which is one point or so please make sure your connecting reconnecting with the before then and so you can additional information and so thank you and without that we will take a fifteen minute break any record stopped Richard President Mr. Valencia President as we will present present Mr. Pollen's President recording in progress Mr. Langham President Closure's Mr. Stembridge. Thank you Madam Chair.  Going back to the discussions for eleven thirty jump ahead to Norway one five nine seven nine one seven the address of five to eleven as is the applicant and or their representative approach please explain the case for yes. Thank you Mr Stembridge.  Madam Chairman, members of the Board Attorney Ryan Smith, Smith, Adams and Morency business address of one sixty eight H Street first floor South Boston.  With me today is the applicant Anthony Moynihan in the project architect Eric Zachares and this is a proposal to a new four unit residential dwelling on a vacant lot with two private roof decks and five covered parking spaces. Ashlawn park is very close to Dorchester Avenue with convenient access to grocery stores and other amenities in as well as a three minute walk to Ashmont MTA red line station in many other bus routes there are also many other mixed use buildings in multi-family dwellings located within this area. This parcel consists of approximately thirty nine hundred square feet and falls within a three F.D. three thousand subdistrict.  The of a multifamily dwelling is in line with the planning goals 2030 while increasing the city's housing stock along area serviced by transit. All units will be two bedroom, two bathroom ownership units. Ground floor will consist of parking for five vehicles along with the trash storage unit. One is a duplex unit located partially on the ground floor and second floor. It will be approximately sixteen hundred and twenty five square feet. Unit two will be located in the half on the other half of the second floor and will be approximately nine hundred eighty five square feet. Units three and four will be located on the third floor and will range from nine hundred and eighty five square feet to eleven twenty two square feet. Both units will have an exclusive right to rootstock access by Hatch. We are violations for use.  We are proposing four units at a three out of some district but the proposal again is in line with the planning goals of Boston twenty thirty of increasing housing stock and in line with many of the other recently approved projects in this neighborhood we have an additional Loteria violation. The proposal as well along with the surrounding context in the existing context where the adjacent loss already zoned for multi-family residences and add further help increase housing opportunities near this transit we have a floor area ratio violation. We're proposing a one point four nine and at one point three is compliant again the proposed density aligns with the goals outlined in the planning context of this area. We have a side yard violation proposal has a setback of three feet on each side and five feet is what is compliant. But this type of setback are similar in this neighborhood in concluding this proposal aligns with the mayor's initiative increasing the housing stock especially in areas of transit neighborhoods as we are a three minute walk away from Ashmont Station and also further is aligned with the recommendation of approval from the planning department at this point in time. I'm going to turn it over to you, Madam Chair for any questions or comments from the board.  >> I thought France said it was a five unit development. The first page for your sorry sorry I was on the same question.  Yeah. Miss Parata, we went through multiple changes on this proposal so we are down to four units and as you can see from the plans that were presented here today we are proposing four units OK, thank you for units and five Carstone,  correct? Yes. OK, questions from the board hearing public testimony. >> Good afternoon Madam Chairman. Members of the board my name is David Jones representing the mayor's office neighborhood services regarding my 11 Ashmont Perkowski will defer to the board's judgment on this matter.  A community process was conducted including in a Buttars meeting on seven six twenty one twenty four which was attended by twelve constituents.  The primary feedback from this meeting was that residents had several concerns ranging from cohesiveness with the neighborhood density on the street late disturbances due to the roof, the trash management parking and excessive ability of the street. I have also received eleven letters of support and three letters in opposition in which one sided that the putting Fire Department is also opposed to the proposal and there was a petition from the residents that expressed that they would prefer that this law be used in the future for the fire department to expand into the ER into the light. >> The petition was signed by sixty constituents including Director Buttars. Additionally, the proposal was reviewed with St. Civic Association which convened on September twenty fourth twenty four.  The association has expressed strong opposition to the proposal and at this time the Mayor's Office of Neighborhood Services defers to the board's judgment on this matter. >> Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Members of the board William Rammasun Counsel Fitzgerald's office also received the opposition concerns from residents of the street and of neighbors by reason our offices would like to go on record in opposition of a proposal. Thank you.  >> Hi my name is Bill Seneschal to Ashmont Part I'm a director Buttar. We were the authors of the opposition letter that ever mentioned with sixty signatures on it. One of the thing that's not been pointed out is according Census report the land is classed as unusable for that. But National Park is literally the narrowest street in Dorchester and only 16 feet wide curved.  Everything else is at least twenty feet or most of them are twenty six feet. This Elm Street should have never been down triple decker. The other recent additions the street or triple deckers across the street from this property that were originally built as four units and knocked down to three.  There are no other multi-family residences that are more than that for except for an existing building that was converted into a troublemaker style that was already five units on there but all the new stuff was three units and we believe that the street is way too small to support yet another oversize unit literally takes up almost the entire lot. There's also on the Buttars meeting and in all of the meetings subsequent we've asked the developers for a construction plan because when they did the two apartment buildings across the street they had use of that empty lot for storage of equipment and parking of vehicles. They won't have that now since they're trying to build on that lot.  They're fully occupied units now in the new condos across the street directly from it plus others two houses on that street and driveway access for the apartment building on the corner and the doctor's office on the corner. There is no real access need in any way that they can have a construction there without serious disruption to the street and we believe that that space is way too small for that large building.  Thank you.  So yes, Can you hear me? Yes, ma'am. Yes. Hi.  So my name is Joe Costello. I live at two twenty two street just around the corner from to two houses from Ashmont Park and I have to I had to put a no parking outside my house because people parking there now because again the station is around the corner and I noticed that since the excuse me the two units went up there's a lot more motor vehicle activity on the streets . The street is tiny, it's very tiny and four cars to get in and out. I take my life in my hands just getting out of my driveway and the same with Ashmont Park.  So it's just right now with those six units that replace two single homes it fills up the street and by adding more units it's just not it's just not reasonable feasible.  Thank you. You have no additional rights. I'm sorry Mr just I am a resident of I I live around the corner on Kingstree been there thirteen years. I'm in support of this. I do think having more housing near transit due to the lack of housing in the community would be beneficial. >> We don't have to worry about it here short. OK Sarah I mentioned hi there my name is Sarah. >> I also want to echo what Chris just said as well. There's not a lot of opportunity to build so close to rapid transit here in Boston and like attorney Spitz had said, this aligns with the mayor's long term plan for adding more units to the city of Boston which is in desperate need of more inventory. Thank you, Cheng, I'm sorry. Yes, I'm in support of this project. I think it is a democratizing image. Yes, we can answer and yes, I'm going to go out there I'm on military Dorchester as well and I'd be in favor of this project. I think we need more housing very much to support. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Additional assistance any other questions from the board that you're planning department recommendation on this, Mr. Hampton? Yes, Miss Manado, you should have our recommendation of approval with this review. OK, thank you Mr. Spencer, where you briefly I just want to just do yes. I just wanted to address some of the things that we heard from one of the neighbors. You know, so very as far as the allocation of unusable land when you have a vacant lot that's just an allocation from the assessing department. How to allocate doesn't mean it's actually unusable again, after reading the Planning Department's recommendation for approval the context and in the in the size of this parcel fits the need of what they're looking for. Again, and much in line with some of the recently approved projects here. I think some of the concerns we've heard just we went through multiple drawings of neighbors and of addressing all their concerns as far as dimensions of the building and reducing in the size and the density some of the concerns that we did hear were preexisting conditions as to the streets and safety of the street and the cars and pedestrians nothing that we could not help. But again will I will do is during the construction phase I will encourage the owners to be again good neighbors just like they were. They built the project directly across a street from this one where they were commended for their good neighboring skills of notifying neighbors any time there's going to be any sort of impact and we get it's a dead end street but if approved that these these contractors will be building this proposal just like they did across the street and we'll ensure that everyone's notified and they do continue to be good neighbors during a construction phase.  Thank you. Are there other questions from Mark on?  Is there a motion I'll make a motion to begin with the PPA designer second that can't Mr. Stembridge yeah. Yes, yes, yes, yes we are.  Yes, yes. Banana yes. Mr. Collins. Yes, I.  I am yes ma'am. It's yes the motion carries the there we have to one six three five to seven. We'll start with the address of sixty four of our history if the applicant and their representative were president would be appointed by the yes. >> Minister Stanbridge. Good afternoon Madam Chair.  I was on the board Richard Land's business address of two forty five Sumner Street he boss on behalf of the petitioner I do believe I provided that to what I do see the plans up there. It is a relatively straightforward proposal but I do have some contacts photos of the surrounding neighborhood in case there are specific questions as you can see and from the notice this involves a relatively straightforward roof deck on the top of an existing three unit building. This would be exclusive use for Unit three only there are two violations that are cited.  The first is the excessive height the base of the roof that the floor of the roof that is just slightly above thirty five feet and therefore I would require a variance for the high limit.  We do believe that is a de minimus violation as it's quite six six above the thirty five foot limit. The second is the side yard in this particular shopping district, the side you're in South Africa ten feet would having not such a feasible layout if we have to set this back we do not obviously go beyond the existing footprint of the building and it is contained or least set back for one day I would point out is the access to this is by the rear door with a spiral staircase that's one of the reasons I wanted to include the context photos.  There are a number of similar roof decks of properties in the immediate vicinity of this site that are designed exactly the same way with access by the spiral staircase. The reason we are proposing I do not understand the board's position when it comes to that is that it's not practical or feasible considering the existing an existing building to arrange for a hatch. The layout of the third unit is quite tight and in order to arrange for a hatch to allow access to that I would really impede with the layout of the unit. So we're requesting the approval for this based upon the release that's necessary.  And again I apologize. I did I know we were on for a hearing in November.  I did provide it to the board but I apologize if the board does not have those contacts photos to show with the existing surrounding conditions look like our best is to learn how to answer any questions before any questions from the board hearing none. Our public testimony.  >> Yes, Madam Chair, members of the board continuing with the mayor's office neighborhood services has previously testified by our office. I will defer to the board at this time our office is conducting Buttars meeting and the afternoon went on to meet with the McCormac Civic Association where they received a letter and support were unaware of any concerns this time defer to the board. Thank you. Thank you. Hello Madam Chairman of the Board Lambrinidis encountered Fitzgerald's office.  Our office let go on record supports the proposal. Thank you Madam Chair. We have no respect with that man.  The motion to work with you there their second back in Mr Stembridge. Yes yes Mizue well yes Miss Brodo yes Mr Collins Mr Collins got here. Yes ok Mr Yes votes yes the motion carries him up.  Thank you very much.  Case has been deferred takes the last of the thirty cases and that was the case VOA once five eight one zero seven with the address of twenty one Wellington Street is the Afrikaans and or the representative of President Clinton following the case of the Yes hello my name is David Freak and I'm an architect a Chilean company. We of the project is a two family renovation with a small rear yard edition and we've provided a no harm letter to the board for the review and approval we're here for God review it questions from the board man public testimony.  Good morning Madam Chairman of the Board Christian Simonelli Basketbrawl Trust and we have both Chiclets from the and with that motion must now approve a second Zaken Mr Stembridge yeah Mr Rentier yes . Yes we were yes Manado yes Mr Collins yes Mr Lamb yes.  >> Chair votes yes the motion carries thank you with that.  With regard to the interpretation case of the New was the case the one six six nine one five with the address of thirty six Orange Avenue it's the and what they represent the president spoke to the board. >> Yes. Thank you again Mr Stanbridge Chairman was the board of Richard Land with the business of two forty five hundred industry is passed on behalf of the petitioner.  This is on as Mr Stammer indicated for interpretation. I would suspect that we may be seeing a few more these as the new zoning these forces start to take shape and the understanding of how the old zoning relates the new zoning and certain approvals that were in effect at the time under the old zoning are somehow now being either just moving forward to be constructed or amendments are being filed. Just by way of background, this project was submitted originally as a three storey to family dwelling operations are also different at the time the zoning district was to have seven thousand and within the to have seven thousand eight three storey building was allowed as a matter of right up to thirty five feet in height. Ironically when we presented this to the board for approval we were not required to seek relief for the three stories as as it was allowed under the dimensional regulations of Article fifty three table the only relief relief that was necessary at that time was for Councilor Parking where we include parking spaces on the adjoining block which is owned by the same proponent modal alignment because of the back of the front of our property and then the rear guard step back which was slightly below the forty five feet that was required. So I'll reiterate at the time there was no relief necessary for the height of the stories as it did comply with dimensional regulations.  Accordingly the building permit which I supplied a copy to the board with our written testimony on this the building permit that issued authorize the construction of a restoring block. The third story that was shown the plans and out that is the action was unprogramed space because the design of the building did have sort of hit roof and we were intending that that to simply remain as our space at that time. However, was the third story of the property and in order to comply with the maximum FBI limitations we were not proposing to program that space at that time.  Ultimately on this issue December 5th twenty twenty three and that was in accordance with the board's zoning release that was granted and at that time it would have become a legally nonconforming structure based only upon the rear stop relief that was granted as well as from South Carolina as this board is well aware Article fifty three that it was amended in May of this year where the zoning district for this property changed from to seven thousand to five and as a result two things happen. First of all under the new BBR 2.5 district maximum building I went from three stories to two and a half stories. That's significant because even though that occurred it occurred in May of twenty twenty four and that was after the building permit for this project would have issued an after issue to allow for a three storey building. More importantly the maximum FDR was modified under the FDR two and the house which actually increased it to an overall five thousand square feet.  This building that as as was being proposed for the board today remains under the five thousand square feet and remains unchanged with respect to the height of the building or the layout of the design of the elevation, we do have plans for the board to review. So during the construction here which often happens, a prominent amendment was filed and in this case the project the applicants to change the upper unit unit to to add three bedrooms.  This would be a four bedroom unit which is something that's pretty consistent in the in that neighborhood. This is more of a one to family style neighborhood and this unit would certainly allow for a larger family household to occupy the building that amendment when it was submitted to Estie with the plans was rejected and refusals were issued for which we recited the number of stories has been extended at three we attempted to communicate with the plans. Examiner advised that it was immaterial that we were using that space on the upper level because the building permit that issued already authorized this property to be three storey dwelling and it was a pre existing noncom structure at the time. The loss of the zoning code protects this exact situation and for more importantly Article 53 of the amendments there two that occurred in May of twenty twenty four also specifically speaks to projects or buildings that were permitted prior to the enactment of the zoning.  Long story short here, Madam Chair, we believe that this is an error in interpretation of how the zoning code is applied.  The building permit which is clear on its face specifically states that the applicant is authorized to have a three storey dwelling.  The building itself as you can see from the plans here are through as you can see here, it presents as a what I would argue appears to be a temporary dwelling but it simply is based upon the amount of square footage that is available under the roof that would create the perception if this were new of this new construction would be considered a three story block.  One of the things I will point out is that the examiner was relying upon the fact that the space was unprogramed at the time it was permanent and therefore somehow that's of some significance or some there's nothing in the Boston zoning code not that there are two that talks about that but whether it's appropriate or not in fact would be illogical for that to be the requirement to determine how to a storm as I suggested in my letter to the board to entice D to say that a space that's not program would not cover the story would contradict the actual plain language of the zoning code.  In that instance you could have a five story building and simply say well the fifth level is not occupied. So fortunately that's not the way the zoning code is written and the use of the space is really immaterial. The definitions and in practice how a story is calculated. So the bottom line a long story short here thank you for allowing me to explain this is that the building had been issued allow this to be recognized three storey building and that meant there were three floors whether or not they removed the original plywood is immaterial to that that evaluation and we believe that the examiner is an error that the building cannot allow three stories should be recognized and that the amendment to allow the use of that level of floor space would be authorized and permitted under both articles for as well as the amendments article fifty three unhappy in answering questions. I know there's a lot of information to be added for interpretation. Thank you and I understand is Joseph compromised to speak?  Yes Madam Chair. Good good afternoon to members the chair that afternoon. Good afternoon Mr Van.  Well I I don't think I add on this particular matter. The building permit was issued with a two storey building so where the attic was unfinished there is a floor plan and this said something there that misselling that's about the only show of the elevations but there is a floor plans that would show that when we issued the building permit about a year and a half ago they did not act on the Treadstone.  It was black. It was unfinished. It's only one day apply for an amendment they come up with a full story. We finish our floor plan for the attic where the zoning code clearly says it's two and a half to one house to its main house. Thirty four for the attic but it's a hundred percent finished therefore I don't think I to add on this the zoning code clearly said two and a half story for the no zoning the acting under the no zoning what the zoning says they did not act on it. They cannot have this for the opportunity to all zoning so we acted on the what was in front examined it based on what this article tells them to do. I three stories they just submitted no plans there with the story they had copies the unfinished plan and then what we approved way back was unfinished and I believe that's why they acted on under the old zoning. So that's what they got at this point I believe I did not want this if I may, Madam Chair, just briefly and I certainly Commissioner Josephson's opinion on this certainly been at this a long time. I think the confusion comes from what is being attempted or what the attempt here is to cite as a violation the only violation that typically would come up in this instance. And we I think we need to recognize the zoning change is significant here. The only issue that could come up with with respect to whether the space was finished or unfinished is FLIR. FAAB looks how a little space or space that is used in the building there are numerous instances in the city of Boston where floor space is unfinished whether that's a basement or an attic and then change later even though the building itself has not changed and the violation that typically issues is excessive that they are they are to see in this particular case because they are still not exceeding the ability to utilize that unprogramed space. Would it be would be permissible under the zoning code once again article to does not specify anywhere anywhere whether this space program or not when dealing with calculation of storms.  The story is the floor space between a roof and the next level and this particular case there is a third story I would point out that the definition of half story is more or less used as an exception to a story not necessarily to say that it should be only a half story. So in this case the fact that there is space between the upper level of the floor on a third level and under the roof that area is considered a story by definition and therefore they would be allowed to program that space provided that they do not see the FAA are and that is pretty straightforward when you look the definitions in Article two. Madam Chair, again, thank you for allowing you to respond to that. Thank you. Questions from the board.  Mr. can you explain how did how does one access the attic and did that change from the initial plans to the new plans? >> I believe there was no access that that a great question at second level a lot of for access up to the attic level but we did not show in as program in the original building permit with bedrooms and a bathroom. That was a change that was made after building of issue.  >> Yes. I was asking how like was there just like oh yes I believe there was a stairwell that access that so there was always a stair accessing the attic or was it just a hole in the wall? Were you in the attic? Yeah not the polls I'm fairly certain there was a stair I have halls I don't have I couldn't find for it but I understand there was sufficient access to get out to the attic. It was just program space. OK, Mr. Collins, the do you want to weigh in? >> Yeah I think that the end originally approved of the building is the height regardless of space that two different variances so I tend to agree with Mr. Windshear.  It's a previously approved project, a zoning change but that should be grandfathered in since we approved it prior to that zoning being in place and if I may now object to Mr. Collins, not one if the board did not have to grant relief for the hightails either it was right to allow it at thirty five feet and I think also significant that the building part of it is the issue actually says story building. So if this were one of those situations where the board had granted relief or a variance for hire for example or the building permit itself did not reference three stories that I would say we have a different situation. We would be asking for different relief but that is the building permit was called before that a new zoning was enacted, correct? Is correct, yes. December twenty three.  Mr. Collins the deal on it and and I did I did provide that in an email to my staff and it does it does specifically stand in there that it has a it's allowed to have three storm. There's the letter so we scroll down to and the zoning decision as well as separate storms.  Yeah, right there in my opinion, regardless of when the building as a whole is is the the rules that we have to follow. Right. So it was pulled in three stories.  It can change minute project. Yeah, no I guess when was the amended permit and that would be after during construction after article three was amended. So the amendment on it was I believe it was June.  >> OK so it sounds like I just looked at the project as a whole again when the amendment was filed.  That's why I believe that's the way it was through the chair at least that's the way the examiner was initially interpreting it where we were abandoning the comment and filing for a new which I would agree with the examiner anything followed after the public notice for the amendment of the zoning would be limited to two and a half stores the building permit are issued and therefore what was allowed under that permit was was protected article for any amendment to that certainly would have to consider the zoning. However, we were already allowed to have the three stories based upon a awfully issued permit. Thank you. This would be the same as any change to an existing building being told was an existing three story building being told that any modifications required only to be reduced out of two and a half stories. That's not that's to the zoning works on the last one to that yes. I beg to differ with Mr. Lane here because they did not act on their previous decision of the board when the board acted to destroy they got a building permit that says to stay and then they submit plans that shows only two stories. You still claim that there was an access to the third unit which claim attic. So we're not sure that that's not something we're not sure I cannot defend it said that there was it finished access to it and what was in front of our plan examiner in June when they applied for the amendment the amendment was only for a while that and then they submitted no plans to act on the decision of the board which was already finished classified done under this permit here. So the plan examiner was within his right as a plant examiner to cite that section that claimed to in our story as the no court tells them to do so.  I don't know the when the board acted given the decision if the decision is therefore perpetuity for all the time even when they do not act on the decision in this case, see if they did not act on the decision of the board. So that's what and for the first year Mr. Allen talks about. But why can't we show the plans to see what we approved and what was acted on and what we get at building permit for when we give the permits to elect the two units with the attic unfinished even though this language the tweet we got less of that it would have been nonconforming to the notes on it. So that's the problem that we have because everything was not told to the examiner at the time. So if you declare that's the issue here thank you. I believe I ad on this one here by that one final one if I may . Well let's let's take the right answer. I think we should approve this but I think it does sort of rest on did the plans really show clear access to that attic when they were approved or not ? And I think Mr. Lenz didn't really give us a clear answer to that question.  You said I think it was real. There is access and Mr. Joseph says there may not have been when they approved of plans and I think that's where I think they're both right. Maybe that but I do think a three story building because that's what the zoning was when when the original permit was approved and it is something we ought to approve today.  OK, are there any other questions on the board?  If not, it sounds like we're ready for a motion so I'm happy to make a motion for approval.  Is there a second stembridge?  Yes, Mr. Valencia. Yes, Mizue Well yes that's Panaro yes. Mr. Collins.  Yes. Mr. Langham. Yes. Chair votes yes the motion carries. Thank you very much.  Next we have a reconsideration case of this is case B away one six six seven one two one with the address of one of the six Webster Street if I heard correctly for five it was I believe was Attorney landscape and also I think is correct. Mr. Stembridge had a chance to replace them as well. OK, Mr. Collins in the recusing it is a six member board Rikyu for the record. Thank you Mr. Stembridge. Madam Chairman, the water shipments to forty five Sunny Street East Boston. I'm here on behalf of the petitioner. I believe James Christopher is with us as well. I'm going to try to narrow the scope of this request that I was recently retained the property owner to review this into advise on what I understood to be a procedural defect in this particular case not getting into a substance or merits of the hearing from the last who was last week. I'll talk just briefly about the request for reconsideration so this board knows it did take up this matter last Tuesday at which time a full presentation was provided I believe by Mr. Christopher at that time the board moved to deny the request. That denial motion was seconded and voted seven to zero once I was retained I looked through the file, I reviewed it and I did notice that the public notice for this this meeting does contain an error and that error I believe would deprive the board of jurisdiction of the matter and in that case the appropriate remedy would be to reconsider rescind and reschedule. We would therefore request that the board through a member who did vote for the denial.  We are respectfully requesting that the matter be taken up as a reconsideration, that the decision essentially be nullified and that a new public notice corrected be put forward and that the matter be rescheduled for further public hearing before we can have any further discussion on the merits of the proposal now I certainly understand there's a little bit of some information a history or some miscommunication on what may or may not have been in the file.  We're happy to present that any further public hearing but we think based upon the error in the public notice that a proper notice should be published first before the merits of the case can be heard again. I was requesting that this be put on I believe January 14th and I believe this sufficient time in order to re notice this in order to ensure that happens . So Carlina's can you just remind folks because I don't think I'm not I don't think everybody who's here today said last week what's what is the issue here. >> What er what was there what you see here it says articles sixty eight section twenty nine infrastructure restrictions and large as applicable to the South Boston neighborhood district fifty three capital East Boston East Boston has separate rooftop restriction rooftop regulations as compared to South Boston and more importantly the notice should reflect the appropriate section of the Boston study before the matter can be heard. Normally I would say this is more of an issue when it's the other way around we would want to ensure that if the project approved that would certainly present an opportunity for an party of interest to objets to the hearing based upon potential de facto notice in this particular case because there was a motion for denial the applicant would be in the position to have the ability to raise that as an issue as an objection. So in this particular case we are requesting that the matter be noticed that a new hearing is scheduled for January.  Thank you. Questions from the board hearing no questions. I don't know if Mr. Hampton you want to weigh in since I see you.  Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. Members of the board I would echo Tony Windsor's comments about having this reconsidered and the merits be heard at a later date.  I do believe that I think everything will come out in the wash during the public hearing and what the city supports the motion for reconsideration based on this administrative issue right now and that during the hearing on the fourteenth I think the merits will discussed . Thank you. If no questions from the board ,may I have a motion also Madam Chair? It's just if you're going and if you do choose to reconsider this the date would be January 20. Thank you.  >> Thank you. Madam Chair. I just propose a procedural standpoint I believe Caroline you have my letter if a member who's sitting today was not sitting last meeting they would not be able to make the motion any anyone can second it but the motion would have to come from somebody who voted for the motion to the OK, well I don't 100 percent remember who was on last week. So if someone who sat last week wants to make a motion, I will make a motion for reconsideration is there a Second Circuit Mr. Stembridge are you trying to get yes. Thank you, Mr. Valencia. Yes, we well yes. Miss Panaro.  Yes. Mr. Langham.  Yes. Chair votes yes. The motion.  Thank you very much. Happy holidays.  >> Happy holidays everyone. See you in the New Year. >> Thank you everyone.