Woburn Zoning Board OKs Third-Floor Addition at 22 James Street with Conditions

The Woburn Zoning Board of Appeals granted a special permit to 22 James Street, LLC on a continuation of the application to permit construction of a third floor on a nonconforming two‑family dwelling at 22 James Street.

Attorney Joseph Tavi of Rubin & Rudin, representing the applicant, told the board the as‑built work added approximately 478 square feet but did not increase the house’s permitted height, which he noted as 31 feet, 8 and 3/4 inches. Tavi said the petitioner submitted an updated site plan and proposed three conditions: limit residential units to two, prohibit use as a rooming house (per the zoning definition), and require the parking shown on the plot plan be assigned to those two units.

The chair and members pressed for clarity on the drawings and measurements after discrepancies between earlier plan dates were raised. Robert Klein, identified as 22 James Street, LLC, said the architect corrected a stair orientation error that was reflected in the Nov. 18 plans. Board members discussed measurement methods for mean roof height and concluded the addition does not exceed the code’s height limit.

An abutter, John Flowers of 61 Kilby Street (speaking for his parents at 29 James St.), urged the board to deny the request, saying the owners began demolition without a permit and arguing the changes were made for profit rather than hardship. "The first mistake was starting this demo project without a permit, which resulted in a stop work order," Flowers said. The applicant responded that proposed conditions and city enforcement tools were available to address future nuisance concerns.

Board members debated enforcement language — including whether to forbid subletting — and agreed on condition wording that would prohibit subletting of bedrooms without the landlord’s written permission and require owner and tenant consent to city inspections to confirm compliance. A motion to grant the permit with the standard and proposed conditions was moved and seconded and carried; the chair described the result as having "passed, barely." The exact vote tally was not recorded on the public transcript at the point of passage. A decision will be prepared and filed with the city clerk and is subject to the statutory appeal period before a building permit may issue.

Why it matters: The board’s conditions aim to balance the owner’s right to alter a lawful nonconform building with neighbors’ concerns about intensity of use and enforceability. The decision underscores how the board applies standard conditions to limit conversions to rooming‑house uses and to tie parking and occupancy to the property’s permitted configuration.