By Michael Coughlin Jr.
Last week, a second abutters meeting was held for a project at 155R Princeton Street that includes a subdivision and would bring new units to the area.
Eva Jones, a city community engagement specialist, explained that the proposal calls for subdividing the parcel to create two separate lots.
One lot would be 3,500 square feet, which will house a preexisting one-story garage on the site. It is proposed that the garage has three stories and three condominium units built on top of it. It should also be noted that the proposal also calls for a change of occupancy.
The other lot would be 1,500 square feet and contain the existing three-family building on the site, which is slated to remain.
Eventually, Jones gave the floor to Attorney Derric Small, who provided more details about the project.
He noted that the garage level would remain a garage and that there would be parking for three or four vehicles inside it. Additionally, the proposed units are all slated to be about 1,580 square feet with two bedrooms and two and a half bathrooms.
Small also spoke about the proposed elevation, indicating that the proposed building has a maximum height of 35 feet, and later noted that the site slopes downward in the rear, where the garage is located.
“The garage sits lower, which is why we’re able to get the three stories at 35 feet because the rear of the property slopes down,” he said.
Later, Small shifted gears to highlight how this proposal aligns with the area’s zoning. He said the property is in the 3F-2,000 subdistrict under the old zoning and the East Boston Residential (EBR)-3 subdistrict under the current zoning.
The project is cited for violations. Small said one was for having two or more dwellings on the same lot, but the proposed subdivision would remediate that.
Another violation was for exceeding the maximum number of stories. “Because we are going up on the garage, the City of Boston considers it a four-story building; the garage being one and the vertical addition of three stories,” said Small.
However, he did emphasize that even with the story violation, the building’s height in feet is within the limit for the zoning subdistrict. The proposal is also cited for its side yard and rear yard, which are preexisting conditions that are non-conforming. The front yard is also non-conforming.
Moreover, Small showed another zoning code refusal letter from the Inspectional Services Department (ISD) for 157 Princeton Street, the location of the aforementioned existing three-family building.
“Because we’re subdividing the lot, it puts the existing property at 157 also into non-conformity,” he said.
This zoning code refusal letter mentioned violations for excessive building lot coverage, insufficient permeable area of the lot, the side yard, and the rear yard.
Following Small’s presentation, Peter Alfe, who owns the property, made a statement about water remediation.
“All the water that comes off 157 and 155 is tied into an underground chamber. When it overfills it goes into wherever the city asked us to bring it,” said Alfe.
“Water, sewer, sprinkler lines, and electric are already into the garage. We’re just waiting for Eversource to run the line to the box on the sidewalk, but on our part, everything is done…all underground work has been done already.”
After Alfe’s statement, attendees began to comment and ask questions. One attendee had commented that the plans show a pole coming down on an overhang on the proposed building that would be on a resident’s deeded parking space.
However, Alfe indicated that a post would not be there and residents could park as usual. The same attendee also wondered how far the overhang went out and if it would be right across from the windows of the existing three-family building. In response, Alfe said that it would end before the windows.
Another attendee who lives behind the garage wondered if the concrete facade on the existing structure would be improved, and Alfe said they would look at it. Alfe and this attendee also discussed trees that hang over the garage and planned to communicate more about them.
Additionally, this attendee appreciated the added density to the area and was excited about the proposal.
As the discussion wrapped up, another question was asked regarding how far the overhang came out from the existing garage, and Alfe estimated it was about seven or eight feet. Also, it was emphasized that the cable and wi-fi infrastructure for 157 Princeton Street needed to be moved from the garage roof.
Regarding potential construction at the site, Alfe mentioned that they would probably have to unload in the street and that things would be stocked inside the garage. He also let current residents know they could park in the garage after work inside it is completed.
As for the rest of this process, the proposal is usually presented to the local civic association, which may vote on it. However, Jones noted that since this is the second abutters meeting for the project, they have already met with the civic association.
The next step will be for ISD to schedule a hearing date with the Zoning Board of Appeal.