Audio Version

City of Somerville Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes

Meeting Date: September 17, 2025 Governing Body: City of Somerville Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Attendees: * Board Members: Susan Fontano (Chair), Anne Brockleman (Vice Chair), Brian Cook (Acting Clerk), Sisia Daglian * Staff: Kit Lester, Madison Anthony * Applicants/Representatives: Rob Passione (Architectural Studio), Krishna (Applicant Partner)

Executive Summary: The Somerville Zoning Board of Appeals convened on September 17, 2025, to address general business and public hearings. Key actions included the approval of the August 2025 meeting minutes and the continuation of the 872 Broadway case to October 1, 2025. The primary discussion revolved around the 8 Melvin Street case, concerning a hardship variance for a dormer face width. After extensive deliberation, the Board approved a hardship variance for a dormer face width of 11 feet 7 inches, acknowledging the financial hardship and the existing structure's limitations, while also approving the withdrawal of two related applications without prejudice.

General Business

• Approval of Minutes for August 2025 Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting
  • Motion: Brian Cook moved to approve the minutes for the August 2025 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting.
  • Second: Anne Brockleman
  • Vote:
    • Sisia Daglian: Aye
    • Anne Brockleman: Aye
    • Brian Cook: Aye
    • Susan Fontano: Aye
  • Outcome: Motion carried unanimously (4-0).

Public Hearings

872 Broadway (ZP 25-000064 and ZP 25-000065)

• Discussion:
  • The case was previously continued from the August 20th meeting.
  • Kit Lester clarified that the case had been re-advertised.
  • The Board discussed continuing the case to the next scheduled meeting.
• Motion: Brian Cook moved to approve the request to continue the case of 872 Broadway, ZP 25-000064 and ZP 25-000065, to the October 1, 2025, Zoning Board of Appeals meeting.
• Second: Anne Brockleman
• Vote:
  • Sisia Daglian: Aye
  • Anne Brockleman: Aye
  • Brian Cook: Aye
  • Susan Fontano: Aye
• Outcome: Motion carried unanimously (4-0).

8 Melvin Street

• Background: This case was continued from the August 20th meeting and involved a hardship variance for a dormer.
• Applicant Presentation (Rob Passione, Architectural Studio):
  • Presented a revised plan with the dormer reduced to 11 feet 7 inches, which meets the dormer separation requirement.
  • The revised plan includes two windows instead of three, addressing a previous zoning variance violation regarding solid wall width.
  • Expressed a preference for the original 13-foot 1-inch dormer due to the significantly larger and more functional kitchen it would allow for the affordable unit.
  • Showed existing dormer configurations and the impact of the reduced dormer size on the kitchen layout, noting that a full-size refrigerator would not fit.
  • Clarified that the dormer is located on the side of the building, not visible from the street.
  • Krishna, a partner, confirmed that the dormer itself was pre-existing, but the window within it was replaced with a casement window of the same size.
• Board Discussion and Questions:
  • Brian Cook: Sought clarification on whether the applicant was requesting the 11-foot 7-inch width or reverting to the 13-foot 1-inch width. The applicant stated their preference for the 13-foot 1-inch option due to kitchen functionality for the affordable unit.
  • Madison Anthony: Confirmed that reverting to the 13-foot 1-inch dormer would bring back two hardship variances, as discussed at the August 20th meeting.
  • Chair Fontano: Emphasized that the larger dormer was never approved and that the current presentation was expected to be for the smaller, 11-foot 7-inch version.
  • Anne Brockleman:
    • Confirmed the unit is an officially approved "affordable unit."
    • Questioned the variances still requested for the 11-foot 7-inch option.
    • Rob Passione: Stated that with the 11-foot 7-inch option, only a window variance would be required, as the dormer separation is now compliant. The window variance relates to not having more than 36 inches of solid wall surface.
    • Brian Cook: Clarified that the dormer face width standard (ZP 25-000048) is still not met with the 11-foot 7-inch option, making it a hardship variance.
  • Sisia Daglian: Expressed inclination to support the 11-foot 7-inch design with the two windows, provided it only requires one variance. Questioned if the existing bathroom window change created new violations.
  • Madison Anthony: Confirmed that Inspectorial Services Department (ISD) reviewed the changes and found no new compliance issues.
  • Board Discussion on Hardship Criteria (Criterion 1 & 2):
    • The Board struggled to define the "unusual shape of a lot or unusual features of the structure" for Criterion 1.
    • Brian Cook: Suggested that the "nature of the existing structure" (specifically the roof configuration) limited the ability to create a functional third apartment.
    • Anne Brockleman: Proposed that the "unusual character of the existing structure" is the dormer that has already been built in violation. Literal enforcement (requiring removal and full compliance) would impose a significant financial hardship.
    • Consensus: The Board agreed that the existing structure's configuration and the financial hardship of reconfiguring the dormer to full compliance could satisfy Criterion 1 and 2. Criterion 3 (no detriment to public good) was previously deemed met.
• Public Comment:
  • No members of the public raised their hand to speak.
  • Public comment portion was closed.
• Chair Fontano's Statement: Expressed strong disapproval of the applicant's initial non-compliance and the burden it placed on the Board, emphasizing that such behavior is unacceptable and unethical. Stated that while she would vote to approve to avoid further hardship, she was not happy with the situation.
• Motion for Hardship Variance (ZP25-000048):
  • Motion: Brian Cook moved to approve the hardship variance for ZP25-000048 for relief from the Somerville Zoning Ordinance dormer face width standards, for a dormer face width of 11 feet 7 inches (when the maximum allowed with newly revised dimensions would be 8 feet 4 inches), based on the hardship criteria findings as discussed and with the conditions set forth in the second supplemental staff memo dated September 11th, 2025.
  • Second: Sisia Daglian
  • Vote:
    • Brian Cook: Aye
    • Anne Brockleman: Aye
    • Sisia Daglian: Aye
    • Susan Fontano: Aye
  • Outcome: Motion carried unanimously (4-0).
• Withdrawal of Other Applications (ZP25-000047 and ZP25-000049):
  • Discussion: Brian Cook noted that ZP25-000047 and ZP25-000049, originally presented, needed to be addressed. Madison Anthony confirmed withdrawal without prejudice was the best protocol. The applicant agreed to withdraw.
  • Motion: Brian Cook moved to approve the request for the withdrawal without prejudice of ZP25-000047 and ZP25-000049.
  • Second: Anne Brockleman
  • Vote:
    • Brian Cook: Aye
    • Sisia Daglian: Aye
    • Anne Brockleman: Aye
    • Susan Fontano: Aye
  • Outcome: Motion carried unanimously (4-0).

Adjournment

• Motion: Brian Cook moved to adjourn the September 17, 2025, meeting of the Somerville Zoning Board of Appeals.
• Second: Anne Brockleman
• Vote:
  • Sisia Daglian: Aye
  • Brian Cook: Aye
  • Anne Brockleman: Aye
  • Susan Fontano: Aye
• Outcome: Motion carried unanimously (4-0).
• Next Meeting: October 1, 2025.