hello mad hello Madam chair um I'm here with allenson Estes the architect for this project um we're here on behalf of our clients Brian Chavez and the Chavez family who own and live in this building um they're seeking to add additional living space within the allowable F zoning but um requiring rear yard setback um and Building height relief uh for primarily the third floor of this existing two family Corner building uh located at three Bruce Street if you go to the next slide Madam Ambassador here you have the existing condition beautiful Victorian uh two family property it is um that third floor that really is going to be lifted up uh and and expanded and that's the case that's before you today uh if you go to the next slide uh Ambassador this just shows the abutters and the slide after that as well shows you the abutters as well just to give you a sense of What's um what's immediately around us in this in this uh area so you can go to the next slide please Madam Ambassador and U again those are the other Butters of the property uh the next slide on uh page six really gets to the heart of the issue here this is the site plan the white area is area that's within the buildable non setback uh area the red represents the setback with the uh Bruce Street the front door being uh at the bottom of the screen and then um Ashmont Street the side of this corner lot and that rear yard in the back and the rear yard is showing a 27 and a half um rear yard because it's a shallow lot and so the shallow lot reduces uh from the 40 that's required uh for this uh particular structure uh in this uh 1 f5000 District uh the uh if you go to the next slide actually if you go two slides to page eight here shows the work that we're doing the left being what's there today and the right being what we're proposing and as you can see um we're we're we're kind of lifting that Center portion and we're expanding those those two bedrooms off the rear of the property uh on the right that you can see uh that net increase interestingly the rear yard setback actually gets a little bit less of a setback we're not even going as far back as what's currently there right now I'll show you that on a different slide uh if you go to the next slide slide there uh next two slide actually this is just a demo plan slide so I don't think that's going to give you much but this slide here actually gets to what I was just saying the left being what's there today and then the right being what we're proposing of the third floor as you can see we're adding H yeah as you can see that's really shows the massing uh of the reare of the property getting a little bit less but more living space nonetheless being increased um and then if you go to the next slide there's actually even a better way to kind of see this here we go again the left being what's there today the right being the increased height of the third floor and that addition of those two bedrooms off the back of the property that's that's really the bulk of the work there if you go to the next slide there's another Vantage for you here what we're looking at this is actually the rear of the property so now Bruce Street we're on the we're on the back of the property Bruce is on the opposite side of the building like the right side of the building uh if you will and what you can see here is on the left the existing building today uh what they're going to do is demo and remove those back portion those back kind of uh odd squares and they're going to bring back in a solid Mass on the right um with a Gable uh the um the uh the structure and this went through a landmark process prior to getting here where we worked through these finer details uh around historic uh preservation issues and as you can see the exterior entrance uh has been or exit really has been upgraded to so that you have a direct exit from that that second floor there uh if you go to the next slide there's another Vantage that will show you um again that what we're trying to do here uh from the front of the house it really looks very similar but you see that increased massing on the third floor next slide please let just gives you kind of a 360 view of the building this is some of the detail we went through with the Historic Landmark um overview process uh detail around the shingles and the different types of materials that are being used and that we really into when we went through that process next slide please uh more of the same of just the different side of the building this being the RAR ins side of the building next next slide please and that's it and just uh I'm just so that again just to reiterate there's two two zoning relief it's the building height stories because we're not exceeding in height but we are exceeding in stories two and a half is allowed here we would now be a full three um and then as I mentioned that rear yard the work we're doing even though it's lesser uh it's still work in that rear yard that triggers that violation um other than that the uh St Mark's civic association sent a letter that I hope you received uh of support I'll pause there any questions any questions from the board hearing none can I have a public testimony yes Madam chair members of the board Connor Newman with the mayor office of Neighborhood Services this time the mayor is off defer to the Judgment of this board some background information in the community process ow and I said host in a Butter's meeting on March 20th uh it was lightly attended um our offic is unaware unaware of any concerns at this time and as the applicant representation representation mentioned they went before the St Marks civic association which voiced their support for this proposal uh with that we'll defer to the board at this time thank you thank you m sure we have no rais t with that may I have a motion Madam chair I like to perform a motion of approval is there a second second Mr stbridge yes Miss B Braza yes chair votes yes motion carries thank you very much have a good evening next we have case boa 1503 897 with the address of 2010 Dorchester Avenue if the applicant and or the representativ is present would they explain to the board please hi Victoria I sent a request to unmute you is that you Victoria phone yes okay perfect go ahead go ahead are you gonna okay someone else gonna be speaking on your behalf or youon no no I'm going to represent myself okay perfect go ahead so um current um we um currently is a single house and we would like to convert a Chu family um there's no um I I see the um refusal letter so we don't need to cut any um the right side for the parking and also we already have a dome there but I just need to make it bigger so fit the bathroom in there and um same uh same footage inside but different layout as you can see exibit one um so um as assistant one is already have two and a half um and the second one The Proposal second floor plan so we just want to um put the bathroom there and the kitchen and second floor and the add it um need to add a another is already your D there it's not big enough so we just want to see if we can make a bigger um to have a standard side bathroom so just to confirm the majority of the work is internal except for uh installing or expanding your Dormer in the Attic is that correct correct any questions from the board we our support from um from the L M um so with that let's have public testimony Madam chair members of the board Conor Newman with the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services this time the mayor's office like to defer to the judgment board our office hosted an abutters meeting on February 21st uh there were no issues expressed from abutters in that meeting with the proposal the applicant went on to the lower Mill civic association which offered their support uh for this proposal with that we'll defer to the board thank you thank you okay we have no raised hands thank with that may I have a motion I like to per for a motion of approval may I have a second second Mr stbridge yes Miss B brazza yes the chair votes yes the motion carries good luck thank you next we have case boa 158 5746 with the address of 4547 brayburn road if the applicant and will the representative is present they explain to the board please yes uh good afternoon Mr St Miss B Braza Madam chair nice to see you on a Thursday afternoon Richard Lind 245 suer Street on behalf of the petitioner um Madam chair members this is a relatively straightforward proposal my client acquired this property in 2012 um it was acquired with the understanding it was a two- family dwelling uh it's been taxed as a two family dwelling since 2012 according to City City Assessor records uh as is typically the case that I normally see uh these type of situations an insurance inspection revealed that the legal occupany of the building was in doubt uh and therefore it was required to seek uh appropriate occupancy as a two family dwelling uh and that's what we're before the board for so if we can jump to the next slide please uh so relatively uh simple change in the occupancy we're not changing anything respect to the footprint of the building uh it's literally uh self-contained with the existing building itself uh and it will be continued home ownership next slide please uh so as you can see just quick zoning overview it is located U backing up to the Stony Brook reservation George wri Golf Course uh over oversized lot of roughly I believe 9,000 square feet next slide please all zoning refusal CES two items uh the off street parking and the uh use this is a 1f district uh as I mentioned it is a long-standing use over 12 years as a two family dwelling uh the property immedately next door is also used and occupied as a two family so it would not be the only two family in the area next slide please uh just a quick zoning summary I won't go into too much detail but we're not again not making any changes with respect to the building itself uh the building pretty much conforms with the one of 6000 dimensional regulations the only items that would be triggered based on uh the legalization of the use would be the use of variant and a parking variance uh since it does require four spaces and there are two garage spaces I would point out there is sufficient room to add additional parking on site as well next slide please uh quick Bird's eyee view uh we can probably scroll through these very quickly uh just so you can see the surrounding context but it does as I said back up to the Stony Brook reservation as well as George W Golf Course next slide please next slide we can come back to these any questions idea the context the neighborhood next slide street view next slide next slide uh we can go one further after this yeah so our ground level shows the garage as well as the basement of the existing structure um we do have uh availability for uh Utilities in the in the uh lower level as well next slide please uh you can see here the main level just has living area uh including U the kitchen dining Etc it is uh set sealed off from the uh other portion of the house and again this is how the uh our client acquired it back in 2012 next slide please upper level here shows the bedroom uh bath and an office um that is uh on occupies the upper level and next slide please just elevations just we included them but there is no change to the building itself as I indicated this is all uh generally existing conditions I'm happy to answer any questions of the board thank you any questions from the board hearing none may have public testimony good good afternoon Madam chair CES Graham with the mayor's office off of Neighborhood Services sorry about that ons hosted an abutters meeting for the applicant on Tuesday February 27th they met with the group Park neighborhood association on March 4th of 2024 and the Civic voted in support of this um application at this time our office would like to defer a judgment to the chairman sorry to the chairwoman thank you any other raised hands oh Madam chair we have no raised hands sorry thank you uh may I have a motion Madam chair I like to put for a motion of approval may have a second second Mr stbridge yes Miss B Braza yes chair votes yes the motion carries thank you very much I'll see you Tuesday next we have case boa 157 5868 with the address of 294 metropoliton Avenue if the applicant and with the representatives present would they explain please hello Madame chair Judah manigat here can you hear me uh yes please proceed oh thank you thank you very much thank you madam chair thank you members of the board uh we are here to present this project which is uh currently a two family house uh in a single family Zone the work that we are proposing really is not affecting uh trigging any uh dimensional zoning requirements but uh but the fact that we are proposing uh to expend the existing two family into the single family so that has triggered uh uh the zoning requirement uh triggers us to go to the zoning board uh so what my client is proposing is to expend uh the second unit right now it's it's a two family unit the first unit is staying the same what my client is suppos to expend the second unit into the attic uh if you can move to the next to the next right now you can see on this page you have the existing uh uh floor plans where we have the first floor which has one bedroom uh first unit one bedroom the second unit has two bedroom uh and the attic is right now unfinished so what my my clients proposing to do is to to redo the attic uh by by uh uh turning the hip roof into a uh A-frame roof and adding a couple Dormers allowing the the head height into the attic and to propose three bedrooms and two bath into the attic uh it's a growing family they've just had two babies and they want to stay in the neighborhood so instead of moving they're hoping they can just expand into the existing uh attic uh by by increasing the height a little bit and allowing them to add some additional bedroom if in the next page you may we may be able to see the uh the existing uh elevation as it is right now and then and uh and and and this page shows the expansion into the attic where we where we show the bedrooms and the additional bathrooms uh and the next page which should should show uh the front elevation have has been affected um is the the like I like I mentioned before the house currently is uh this is the this is the elevation showing the the the Dormer being turning from an hip roof Dormer to an A-frame Dormer with the DOR uh ifraim uh and and with the Dormer uh added um what we are what we proposing to do is is uh is to really keep the uh the house as it is it as two family uh but just expanding into the attic and and increasing the Liv uh living space for the family any questions from the board hearing none may I have a public testimony yes madame chair members of the board Conor Newman with the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services this time the mayor is also deferred to the Judgment of this board on hosting a Butter's meeting on March 28th uh when the proposal was well received by a Butters who were eager to see the family stay in the neighborhood and have it continue to be own or occupied uh with that we'll defer to the board at this time thank you thanks we have no raised hands with that may I have a motion mam chair I like to put for a motion of approval with a provis that the project under goes bpda design review paying special attention to the roof line may I have a second second Mr strid yes Miss B Braza yes chair also votes yes the motion carries thank you next we have case boa5 55503 with the address of 50 Prescott Street if the applicant and will a representative presid yes mrri yes Mrs drid so good evening Madam chair members of the board good to see you on a Thursday evening my name is Derek small and I'm the attorney for the project I have a business address at 51 Dobson Road and today we're here seeking relief to erect a rare addition to the uh one family dwelling the zoning subdistrict here is a 1 f6000 and our lot size is approximately 5,000 square feet um the violations um on the refusal letter are the F which the requirement is 0.5 we are proposing 7 side yard violation requirement is 10t it's at 3 3 and A2 fet it's a pre-existing non 3.4 pre-existing nonconforming condition it's already existing with the current structure and then the rear yard violation um uh the requirement is 40 feet and we are proposing 18 as you can see as on the site plan that's in front of you um the addition it says proposed addition 500 square feet um it's two floors so it be 1,00 square foot uh th000 feet added to the existing property and again we are still 18 ft um away from the property line in the rear uh my client Joe Gardner is on the line has four kids his family is expanding as he wishes to move his mom um in with him so that she can age in place um I'll stop there and I can answer any questions that the board may have at this time thank you um question on uh bpa's recommendation comments about a a mature tree in the rare can you speak to that um I those are just I'll stop right there and I will get back to that um Joe is there Joseph's on the line in the rear of the property I think there is a tree in the rear but um if that's an issue for the bpda I don't think that it has to come down I don't see it on the on the site plan okay questions but I'm not sure that it even exists but if you scroll down um to the pictures again I took pictures from on the side just showing that there is um three f Ames in in the in the um area as well that's the rear of the yard so okay not a tree back there and those are just pictures of other three families twos and threes in the neighborhood okay other questions from the board yeah I mean I'm looking at the um at the Google Earth and it seems like the existing tree is not on your property yes it's not there's a tree back there but it's not on our property right so the the main concern would be with the addition would it um you know how much of the canopy would you have to remove if any um I don't think we would be removing any canopy because it's on the neighbor's property if if it extended over onto our property um it I don't think it's going to require any removal of the canopy but um I don't know if Joseph if you're on you can speak to that but we don't and do you have and do you have um a butter support the rear butter support for the project I don't know I know we had meetings we had an abuts meeting see stop right there for a second that is the ab Butter's garage backing up to our property and again our aition is still going to maintain 18 feet from that fence inward towards our properties um so I don't know why the abart would be um opposed to it it's still they can't see anything from their backyard to direct the butter because that's their garage and we're still going to have 18 feet from that fence inward to the edge of the property yeah what yeah what you're seeing now is the the the butter in the rear and that's their garage are butting up to our fence can we uh have public testimony so could yeah learn a bit more on that question good evening Madam chair and members of The Board cesy Graham with the office of with the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services on hosted an abutters meeting for the applicant on Tuesday January 23rd there were some concerns raised about um the applicant's current use of the family of of the home as a two family that uh the applicant did address um that is currently being used as a one family um the applicant did meet with the High Park neighborhood association on April um 4th of 20124 um those questions were raised again um the applicant did agree to meet with the abutters and habant um covered their concerns um however the association uh sent a letter of opposition at this time our office would like to defer judgment to the board so can you clarify um you you it sounded like you said issues were addressed but then there's still a letter of opposition were you part of that process do you understand what was addressed and what's still outstanding so um the issue that was raised um there was some concern that there were two stoves um one of the um attendees of the meeting um I guess pulled some information about this property and found out that there were two stoves existing uh they wanted to know why there was a need for two stoves if it's one family so that was the concern they asked if ISC could stop by to do a walk through to kind of check the property um ISD did um stop there and was able to um take a look at the property they didn't raise um any um flags that would um well they yeah they didn't raise any Flags but they did say there were some parts of the property that they were unable to get into um that the applicant um did not I guess did not allow them to enter um some parts of the property so they were able to do from from what they were allotted um they were able to to look into the property um but all of this was requested by the um the folks at the the Civic um and so they just decided that because there was so many outstanding things that they wanted um covered which was one is this really um a one family or two family to to them um they didn't believe that the applicant and this is one person um to be honest um but uh they raised that concern that um they they just didn't believe that the applicant was being truthful with what the current use of the property is therefore might not be honest with going forward what they're trying to do now if if that means that they're going to try to profit off of this property um as a two family those were the concerns and they were not completely convinced that this was uh for his family but again every time those questions were raised um the applicant did cover them did you know um name that his family from Jamaica were coming and that's why he would need the the the the Adu to house um those members of his family okay thank thank you madam sh can I also step in because I um just Thomas from inspectional services so we did receive a call um just requesting the information that Sicily um we did have inspectors go out and everything did check out um it is being currently used as it's intended to so there were no issues just wanted to speak up that we did hear from the neighborhood group as well um and had a chance to speak to the owner and was able to confirm that um the property is being used as intended um and doesn't seem to um whatever is being you know used for the property has anything to do with um this current uh issue so just wanted to you know mention said that Y and then I'll open up the floor um is any of the elect official offices on NOP okay I'll open the floor to Lauren and then go to the caller Lauren yes go ahead um I've T typed a lot into the chat um the bump out which would be the ex the state your name and address for the record please sorry laen Chandler mclusky 1881 hide Park AV in hi High Park um the bump out is not 20 feet from the property line it's only 11.2 and that's the egress from the Adu that he currently has is he adding more kitchens so that he add is he's adding another Adu because I question why he needs an egress a door and stairs from the third second and first floors as well as an egress from the basement thank you okay um and then caller um 617 364 um sent a request to unmute you Craig y go ahead thank you madam chair Greg Martin the hiac neighborhood association Co Colchester Street in the neighborhood this Prescott Street address um have I want to bring on to the committee and I'm sorry if I offend I I am speaking with the committee Madam chair can you can you please proceed I I mean I'm having trouble hearing you are are you in support or opposition and can you just State why no opposition and I want I want to give the reasons if I could um right the this zoning refusal letter um is um missing a significant violation the open space violation the rejection letter isn't complete um I want to state that it might be um seriously incomplete because the Adu that was placed in the basement that's why there was confusion because no one knew there was Adu um um that's why it was people thought it was being treated as a two family and he didn't explain that at the a Butters meeting or the neighborhood meeting that we have an Adu the basement so it was always presented as a single family even though it appeared to be a two family now we understand um but the Adu um in order to preclude all zoning violations was supposed to be built in the complete um a footprint of the existing building um but they do have a bump out the back which means they're no longer precluded from the zoning um zoning regulations I.E parking spaces apply and indeed they need another um um 1,800 units of open space for the second unit so this the terribly short on the open space violation but that wasn't unnoted in the rejection letter and and this is a this is a significant expansion on on a small lot and um the butters as a prior of butter um think it's entirely too much okay please please wrap up please wrap up okay I have no additional question okay Madam chair if I may yes please uh can you Andor even miss Thomas shedlight on the Adu and other so the current legal occupancy of the building is a one family dwelling with an U an Adu does not change the occupancy of the building so it's still a one family dwelling and all we're doing again is erecting a rare addition to the one family delling within Adu and so again the violations that were listed on the refusal letter I can't speak is as to whether they're correct or not but that's what we were given that's what we're proceeding on um again my client has cooperated thoroughly with ISD as Jessica said ISD has been out there I don't know where PE people tend to make stuff up along the way as they go and the fear of the unknown I guess I don't know Miss Madam chair but again addition to a one family dwelling with an Adu and um that's what we're proceeding with thank you any other questions from the board just so just for clarity um the extension to the rear is for the one family dweller that's correct okay and then the Adu is for whatever you know for a family member or whoever is is four kids and he plans to move his mom in is exist clarify to um on the chat Lauren uh I think we just heard from her Chandler said that the tree was not in her property is she the rear butter I don't I don't know on the map can she clarify for saying that on record that the tree is not on her property that if she is the re butter okay I sent a request to unmute Lauren are you the r butter Lauren I don't think she is oh she said well it says in the chat the trie is not on her property oh but um I want clarification that she's not the Miss Chandler are you at 1881 High Park AV yes I am okay so she is the rare butter and and you mentioned that the tree is not on your property correct so Mr small the surveyor the site surveyor doesn't show the tree on your client's property so something is incorrect I don't think there is a tree on our property actually on on the Google Earth the tree shows it on not on the property either so um I think that's what maybe bpda was referring to in terms of um not having like Clarity in terms of the tree but we just wanted to make sure that um the site server is correct and there's not a tree at the rear property Joseph can you elaborate on that hello yes yes we can hear you hi uh good evening Madam chair and everyone there is a tree and um it's on my side of the fence so I'd have to presume that's my tree and um um I was under the impression that keep in the tree might uh be okay but if it's not you know that could Al also be taken care of okay so great so what so then your site survey is um you know doesn't show the existing tree so I I would just say that that needed to be shown um typically is existing and then new proposed so we can assess completely what's on your proper property but I have enough answers so I'm I'm I'm okay moving forward with a motion when when the chair allows me I am ready may I have a motion um Madame chair I would like to put forward a motion of approval with a Proviso that the applicant works with bpda um in ensuring that the tree if it is on their property uh that works within with with the tree um that would be my recommendation is there a second Mr stbridge yes Miss better brazza yes chair votes yes the motion carries thank you madam chair members of the board we will uh work with the bpda on that thank Sam from legal Madam chair yes in terms of the Proviso that was given um attention to working with the tree are there specification on that so basically um work with the work I'm sorry I'll be a little bit more clear to work with the dimensions of the rear addition to preserve the existing tree thank you very much yep thanks for requesting that clarification okay thank you next case NE next we have case boa 49589 with the address of 8 Friendship Road is the is the applicant and or their representativ pres will they explain please yes is Anthony Watford my my plan is to um do an addition to create a two family dwelling I will be un occupied and the rest of the unit will be occupied by family members it be two different family members occupied that's just dwelling a mother and daughter with two kids so that's my proposal basically extend out 14 feet in the reare and we I told my neighbors that front house will stay the same to keep the Aesthetics of the street the same and everything else in the rail take place so how far are you from the rear with the proposal and without the proposal um from the rear I go back 14t okay and how much does that how much does that leave you open space space yes about I believe 30 feet still my lot is 5,000 square feet and I did have two meetings and no one opposed it matter of fact there was four I've been here almost 30 years on the street and based on my empty nester so my house is pretty large for a single person and I was hoping to have it done by last year my sister came back from Florida because job went mobile so she could work from anywhere go ahead okay let's pause and see if there are questions from the board okay okay hearing none can I have public testimony yes madame chair members of the board Connor Newman with the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services this time the mayor's office defer to the Judgment as board we don't have a ton of information due to the Personnel changes that have occurred in our office uh but we understand that neighbors were notified uh we're unaware of any specific concerns at this time the applicant met with the bnell family civic association um last October um with that we'll defer to the board at this time thank you and Madam CH I have no raas may I have a motion chair i' like to put for a motion approval I have a second second Mr stbridge yes Miss B brazza yes chair votes yes motion carries good luck sir happy birthday to me thank you next we have case boa 153 8430 with the address of three Rosa street if the applicant Andor their representative is present to explain pleas go ahead yes we're here Michael Chavez was trying to get in as a um presenter looks like he needs to be raised to a panelist j yes he was trying to get it yeah thank you go ahead Mike I try to make you okay there you go you accepted it you just have to unmute yourself when you're ready while okay perfect you guys hear me okay yes sir EXA uh Madam chair members of board good afternoon I'm good to you all Mike Chavez architect and the representative for the client uh 26 ill Park the address um Janette and Leah Thomas are also here they're the owners of the single family home located at three Rosa uh we're proposing to put a rear twostory Edition on an existing two and a half story single family home uh the um only by ations for this project are an existing non-conformity which is a side yard setback on one side uh a rear yard setback which the rear addition triggers as well as the F uh we are proposing essentially an extended living area so this the addition uh will have its own kitchen and bathroom a bedroom and living area but it will have a direct connection to the existing home on the first floor the purpose of the addition is for uh Miss Janette Thomas who's the daughter of uh um I'm sorry Leo Thomas who's the daughter Janette Thomas uh to allow um Janette to age in place and so she's going to the daughter will be living there in the um the new addition that we're putting in back to help take care of her as she ages while at the same time having her own private space to be able to live in at the same time so the house will continue to remain a single family home um with this addition on the back um and uh that's The quick summary you know the typical living on the first floor and and and a bedroom and bathroom with closet on second floor in small balcony thank you any questions from the board hearing none may have public testimony good evening Madame chair CES and members of the board CES Graham with the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services ons hosted an ABS meeting for the applicant on Wednesday January 17th they also met with the East River neighborhood association on Monday March 11th of 2024 no con concerns were raised at either meeting at this time our office would like to defer to the chairwoman's Judgment thank you thank you with that may I have a motion Madam chair I'd like to prer a motion of approval may I have a second yeah Mr stbridge yes Miss B Braza yes chair votes yes motion carries good luck thank you members of the board next we have case boa 153 8456 with the address of 94 Westminster Street if the applicant end with the representative is present would they explain to the board please good evening Madame chair members of the board my name is Eileen Rosa from Rosa design and construction on behalf of the owner Daniel bis who right here next to me um The Proposal eration is the construction of a rear staircase to serve as an additional means of eress for the attic floor which is a pre-existing usable space um of this single family dwelling um the refusal letter received uh from inspectional Services Department um states that the um alteration is in violation with the rear stepback um the required setback in this uh zone is 40 feet the existing setback rear setback is 33 feet and with the proposed rear staircase um the additional mist of igis uh it will be um 28 fet um it is important to know that this is a single family home and there's no uh change of use or interior alterations um other than the proposed additional means of erress and the exterior door uh located at the rear facade um this is all I have for now thank you thank you any questions from the board hearing none may have public testimony good evening Madam chair and members of the board CES Graham with the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services on hosted an ABS meeting for the applicant on Wednesday January 31st they met with the High Park neighborhood association on Thursday March 7th of 2024 who voted to to not oppose um going back to the abutters meeting there were some concerns raised just primarily about the um stairway being built before going through the process and they just wanted to understand uh the Dynamics of that of which the applicant was able to um cover the the question by saying this is you know their way of of making sure that they go through the process the right way um but other than that no other concerns were raised at this time office would like to defer the to the chairwoman's Judgment thank you no raised hands thank you with that may I have a motion Madam chair I like to put for a motion of approval we have a second second Mr stbridge yes Miss B brazza yes chair votes yes the motion carries good luck thank you thank you than you next we have case boa54 6755 with the address of five renold road if the applicant and or their representative is present they explain to the board please yes I am um good evening uh Madame chair and members of the board uh I'm linkoln Matra I am the owner and the applicant um owner of five Reynold Road and also the applicant and what we are proposing the the address is a single family home uh it has two levels and what we are proposing is to extend the second level which is right over the first level of our home um I'm sorry trying to get you to the right pictures they're a little bit skewed so we can see so as you can see the the wheels St with the plot planets there uh the violations were that there was insufficient front um front depth space a requirement is forth 25 feet and insufficient side space the requirement is for 10 feet uh this property um when we looked around on the other properties in Hy Park we didn't see many other properties that actually met those requirements so um we're also not changing the footprint of the house the foundation that's there will Remain the only modifications that we're doing is to the second level of that property and we're just extending it for more uh living space um you can go to the next slide trying to get you a good picture so you can see the the drawings of what we're proposing keep going down uh keep going down to the layout plan okay so in this in this space there is a a there I can see really well there it looks like it says Fee number one but there's number one I think it say phas number one okay yeah yeah so that is the additional space that would be built out uh on the second level of that property okay understood any questions from the board hearing none may have public testimony good evening Madam chair CES Graham with the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services on hosted an abutters meeting for the applicant on Tuesday January 30th they and there were no concerns raised at that meeting they met with the High Park neighborhood association on Thursday March 7th 2024 who voted to support at this time our office would like to defer judgment to the chairwoman thank you thank you and M we have no raised hands with that may I have a motion Madam chair I like to prefer a motion of approval may I have a second second Mr stbridge yes Miss B brazza yes chair votes yes the motion carries good luck sir thank you next we have case boa 154 9736 with the address of 43 n Street if the applicant and or the representative is present would they explain case to the board please hello um am I can you see me uh we can't Jessica she not a panelist Karina there you go hi my name is Karina broom Stein I'm the owner occupant of the two family at 43 n um the proposed plan is to demo the existing porch rebuild it in the same footprint with a roof on top um the porches need to be replaced and we just want to make an improvement of having a roof on it so that we can use it more often when it rains great thank you uh any questions from the board hearing none may have public testimony yes madame chair members of the board Conor Newman with the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services this time the mayor's also defer to the Judgment of this board uh on said the applicants circulate uh Flyers to a Butters within 300 feet and they're also in contact with the Longfellow neighborhood association and presented to them uh this past March uh with that we'll defer to the board at this time thank you I do see a raised hand here um second Jennifer are you looking to give testimony for this proposal hello um you know we live 14 feet away so state your name and address oh sorry I'm Jennifer Park 45 null Street renale okay go ahead so we live next door we're 14 feet away um when we're just concerned that it it at least stays within its footprint um and and the idea that at at some point we we're concerned that they're going to want to enclose it and make it part of the um their house um so those and you know affects our sunlight um I we hope that the the when you when people do anything we have wet basements here and so we hope that the footings don't cause our um flooding in our basement which we've had in the past um thank you I think she clearly stated the that it was a rebuild to the same footprint so right uh okay uh any other raised hands hearing none may have a motion Adam chair I'd like to put forward a motion of approval is there a second second Mr stbridge yes Miss B Braza yes chair votes yes the motion carries good luck thank you next we have case boa5 2488 with the address of 340 Baker Street the app Andor the represent is present they explain to the board please hello uh good evening anyone everyone this is Ser Garis I'm here representing 340 B Street um conversion of existing two family uh to a two new hles non change on the footprint uh existing building the only thing we going to going to be adding one is the uh left side back which will be a um second floor second ER and adding two dormers on the attic to create more relable space for the second floor unit Okay so just to confirm you're not it's a two family and it's staying two units yes that's part okay questions from the board hearing none may I have public testimony good evening uh Madam chair and members the board uh my name is Ben tyag West Roxbury neighborhood leao from the office of Neighborhood Services and a Butters meeting was held uh for this project on January 17th um and at that meeting neighbors asked the proponent to move the porch uh from the rear of the house to the side of the house um the proponent did agree to these changes um it looks like since then plans have not um been updated um and this project was um seen before the West rockbury neighborhood Council um and was um voted favorably um by the West rockbury neighborhood Council um and in in addition to that the office of Neighborhood Services is aware of one letter of opposition from the rear of butter to this project okay thank you have no raised hands thank you that may have a motion before before we do that uh are we are we looking at the correct plans uh I can uh share the screen with you and show it uh no you you won't be able to share the screen um I believe I believe we have the old plans would would would you be able to share the screen with me so I can see them no we can't do that no no can we pull up this can we pull them up again so that we can uh he can double check okay thank you mad Madam chair this is Stephanie yes um the applicant submitted um some updated plans to us today and I informed them that um they would need to request um a deferral to allow the plans examiner to review and stamp the plans I see so these are these are not those are the previous plans that the plans examiner reviewed but they submitted um some re revised plans um today but that's not sufficient time for the plans examiner to review and stamp okay so this still reflects the um but the scope is the same similar right yeah I think the um what was changing um as they say was the site plan it look it's the deck the location of the decks correct that that yeah the S plan the side plan is still is still the same uh it showed the driveway on the left side of the building uh that Stills the same the only thing there was that re change that was super met today because we didn't know there was not there yet uh it just rear deck that was moved to the left side of the building so the deck that we saw on the earlier screen is going to be moved to the other side opposite side not on the driveway side correct the opposite that's correct yeah yeah there's no driveway on the right side of the build that's the old plan you guys are looking at it but the the issue is um the zoning violations still stay the same or would or or do or are they new ones or do Dimensions change with the relocation Madam we wouldn't know until the plans examiner review okay so now I now I get it okay um so I'm good with then putting a motion potential of deferral okay is there a second second or that is a motion I put for a motion uh Mr stbridge yes Miss B Braza yes votes yes the motion carries uh Samantha do you have a new date for the the date is June 13th Madam chair okay so please come back June 13th we will have the updated plans and the any what the new violations are if they are different from what we see now thank you okay thank you next we have case boa5 5 663 with the address of 108 Murdoch Street if the applicant is present and or their representatives is here would they explain to the board please yeah hello everyone um I'm Brian and this is Trish um we're the owner occupants of 108 Murdoch Street um and um the person listed is Victor that's our contractor um who submitted the application um but essentially what we want to do is to extend an existing Dormer that's on the property um there's going to be no change to the existing footprint um there's no changes to the ex um current roof height either um if you go to page uh seven yeah this okay uh page eight um this shows uh kind of the the current um Dormer that's already there and what we're doing is we're essentially just extending that one um if you go to slide 10 uh I think the number is a little weird uh 11 uh yeah so in this one you can see the extension of the Dormer and this additional Dormer is essentially just just incorpora an additional bathroom um so right now there's um only one bathroom in the whole house and due to our expanding family um we need another bathroom in the house it would be um much more convenient um I don't know if and then it'll also make our space much more usable I think yeah if you go to uh page 12 sorry the backgrounds uh yes this one right here you can see that there's an existing the existing roof line really um cuts like it's very um steep so um by extending the Dormer it actually enables us to use the the hallway that's there because right now um you know even I walking down the hallway would have to duck and I'm I'm five feet tall so it's really not usable so it would also just be improving just the property overall so that you know um families can stay in Brighton thank you any questions from the board hearing none may have public testimony yes Madam chair members of the board Connor Newman with the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services this time the mayor's off like to defer to the Judgment of this board ow said the applicant circulate a notice to a Butters within 300 ft uh we do not receive any letters in support or in opposition we're unaware of any concerns at this time uh the applicant then went on to meet with the Brighton Alon Improvement Association and secured their support with that will defer to the board thank you may I have a motion oh I'm sorry more you oh I'm sorry Mora sorry Mora sorry this is Mora McCrae from the councelor bradden's office the councilor would like to go on record in support of this project thank you with that may I have a motion M CH like to for a motion of approval may I have a second second Mr stbridge yes Miss B brazo yes chair votes yes the motion carries good luck thank you before we move on on return um and ask about with me please of course then I'll ask uh case vaa 158 4944 with the address of 82 to 96 West Avenue is someone present to represent that case [Music] now yes just yes sir please please go ahead yes uh good evening dear chairman and board member my name is haris Kumar ptil I'm res I'm owner of the capis pan sub and we changing the pro no problem uh May uh may I have public testimony Madam chair members of the board Conor Newman with the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services like to defer to the Judgment of the board at this time uh we're unaware of any concerns and we don't believe that this proposal will lead to any negative impacts to the neighborhood thank you thank you with that may I have a motion I'm M chair I'm sorry go ahead Miss B Madame chair I'd like to perer a motion of approval is there a second second Mr stbridge yes M better brazza yes shair votes yes motion carries goodbye thank you with that we will then move forward to the rediscussed for 5:00 pm that is case boa 151 8380 with the address of 104 child Street if the applicant and or their representativ is present will they explain the case to the board please sure for the record Lawrence estara 175 Federal Street joining me is Chris Hosford who's the architect um this is a very unique property it was We Believe until about 40 years ago a garage or another form of accessory building it was converted into a single family home about 40 years ago that's what the assessor records suggest and um Chris has been working with drors pain and Mr Nemo to uh totally reconfigured this property uh the revised plans are now on the screen which Chris will explain there were two abutters meetings there were appearances before the neighborhood Council there were also uh independent private meeting uh with some of the neighbors and we believe we have a plan which uh all are in favor of Chris you want to explain the new plans for the board sure um just to repeat the or to lay out the um what we're requesting relief for is front yard set back and then rear yard set back it because we are creating a new deck by removing part of the existing building um and then uh excessive F so we're going up to 08 um the priority for the our clients is that they want to create a space that they can age in place um we're creating One internal garage space and then uh doc Spain is a therapist and she would like to practice out of her house so we're creating an office office and a small waiting area off on the first floor which this is an existing plan if you want to continue scroll down so that's the existing rectangle that's a three-dimensional view of the addition and then here's a here's a basic plan showing a new entry foyer a single car garage an office a waiting area and a small Powder Room uh on this we would add a second floor then that would be currently used as a workshop for Mr nzo and then eventually the idea is that could be a caregiver space um we're creating some exterior use space by creating roof deck on a current you know flat roof don't know if there's anything else I should explain or just take questions at this point yep we can open up to questions are there questions from the board okay hearing yes I'm I'm trying to I'm trying to understand um bpa's concerns regarding you know the F the front and sidey yard um kind of its preference to wanting to conform to that so this is a revised plan we had originally submitted a plan that showed a very different configuration and through that process we had actually three different neighborhood that Butters meetings this is a revised plan we originally requesting a two-car garage we've reduced it down to a onecar garage uh we've had we meet the sidey guard setbacks now so the so how how so in so the existing home is to the rear um and and so your addition what is kind of its alignment to the adjacent home like I would like to know if it conforms to where the building is to your butter the the addition well you can see um 26 Lee Street which is on the left hand side there's a little outline of the existing structure there yeah I can see that is that so it aligns to the building to the left it will align I'm I'm not uh well 26 Le street is basically on the front yard property line so we're not aligning to that we're setting our building back 8T from the front yard right right but you see on the drawing to the left yeah that you have kind of a um a hash to the building next to it I'm trying to understand the Moto alignment and so your your building is set back but your adjacent the adjacent of butter is coming forward more is that correct that's correct okay so that's why Madam chair and um and Norm I was just trying to understand the feedback from bpda in terms of their concerns I I think the answer is that the bpda feedback was based on a very different plan okay is Jeff Hampton on to confirm that he's not going to be on but I I no but I I think what you're saying is your front yard setback is more than the setback of the of the property next to you is that correct that's correct I mean we would meet the modal if 108 child Street was not so far back from the set right correct that's that's why I'm I'm okay with this and that's why I was trying to address bpd's concern um because I didn't see a problem with it yeah okay uh any other questions from the board hearing none may have public testimony Madam chair members of the board Conor Newman with the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services this time the mayor's off defer to the Judgment of this board as you heard from the applicant representation this went through a lengthy Community process uh with the changes they made they presented before the jpnc on February 7th uh where the neighborhood Council voted to support overwhelmingly um with that will defer to the board at this time I do understand I think there was a Proviso in the jpnc letter regarding some kind of fencing um the board might have more information than that on me but just want to bring that to the record thank you and M chair we have no ways answer than great uh may I have a motion can I can I ask the applicant to expand on the gpnc recommendation of the fencing sure if you bring up that same image we can discuss that so on the rear of the house where we created this small patio the rear reutter requested we provide a six foot fence at that property line that's why it says six foot fence yeah exactly okay so it seems like you're already are going along with the recommendations that GP yeah we right exactly so we add thanks for confirming that thank you with that may I have a motion Madame chair I would like to put forward a motion of approval with bpda design review may I have a second second Mr stbridge yes Miss B brazza yes chair also votes yes the motion carries good luck thank you thank you madam chair thank you board all right have a good night everyone I'll see you on Tuesday good night thank you good night good night e e e e e e e e e e e e for