Somerville Zoning Board of Appeals 8-19-2026

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. I'd like to welcome you to the City of Somerville Shortening Board of Appeals for Wednesday, August 19th, 2026 at 6.01 p.m. Pursuant to Chapter 2 of the Acts of 2025, this meeting of the Somerville Zoning Board of Appeals will be conducted via remote participation. A recording of these proceedings can be found online at Agendas, Minutes and More. This evening under General Business we have minutes of the July 15th, 2026 meeting Zach, Mr. Clerk tonight would you please ask make a motion?

Yes, thank you. I'm going to make a motion to approve the meeting minutes of July 15th, 2026. Second? Second.

All right, Olivia. Thank you. All in favor as we go around? Zach Zaremba? Olivia Mobay, Devise, Sisia Daglian and Susan Fontano I abstain. It does carry with the three. Does not need a quorum for something like this, I believe. Am I correct on that? Kit? I believe that's correct. Thank you. Okay. That's what I thought. Thank So let the record show that the minutes were carried for July 15, 2022. Next up is the public hearing 22 Park Ave. Mr. Clerk would you please open that please?

and we're going to open 22 Park Avenue ZP26000035 Kenneth Hurd is seeking relief for a non-compliant rafter slash wall intersection in excess of two feet from the finished first floor on the right rear portion of a building in the neighborhood resident. Zoning District, which requires a hardship variance.

Thank you. Is Kenneth Hurd here? Or his attorney?

This is Kit. I have just sent an invitation for Kenneth Hurd to be promoted to panelist. Thank you.

Hello everybody.

Hello, welcome.

I'm Ken Hurd, I'm the architect and I'm also representing the owners this evening. And they are Sharon Gauteneau and Whispering Deer. I think they are hoping to attend too, I don't see them yet.

Okay, so why don't you start us off? Tell us what you're gonna do.

Well, I have a short presentation. I hope everybody had a chance to read some of what we prepared and let's see it. If you can let me share the screen And maybe walk me through one. Oh, there it is. Do I have rights to share?

This is Kit. If you try to share, it should send me a prompt to allow you to share. You should be all set now.

So I, what do I do? I see. I think that's what I want. Tell me what you see. Do you see my screen or do you see a full screen of the presentation?

We see... Go ahead.

We see your PowerPoint. We see the slides on this side, so we don't see it in presentation mode, but we see your Powerpoint.

If I put them in presentation Mode do you think you'll be able to see that or?

I think so.

Okay. Is that better?

We see your view. Now, so we see the presenter mode. So if you maybe go up to the corner and hit end show.

I'm sorry what do i do?

Try going one button over and do swap displays maybe? Let's try that. There we go.

That work?

Yep.

Okay, now I have to... Okay, anyway this is short. I don't want to take a lot of your time reviewing most everything that i have put in the documents submitted and let's see if There we go. Are you seeing the screen? I have a toolbar in the middle of mine, but if you're seeing it, I'm good.

I think just hit continue to share on that pop-up and you should be okay.

I'm working at two screens here, that's why I'm...

There we go. You're all set now.

Good. So just to orient you, this property is located it was built in 1910 and located about a quarter of a mile from Davis Square if you If you walk east on Park Ave and turn right, I forgot the name of the road within a block or so, you are in Davis Square. And the configuration as you can see Hopefully you can see where my pointer is. Configuration, there's a dominant portion in the front and a smaller portion in back. This was all built 1910 on an existing foundation so this represents something that actually this shape prior to 1910 and it was probably not unusual at the time because

This was before the water and sewer lines were put in, and there probably needed to be a place for however they handled sewage at the time. So that, and then you see here what we have is this is the dominant roof which is higher than this back roof. Almost looks like an addition but I don't think it was. Oops, sorry. And to give you a little context in the neighborhood, just in case you haven't seen this. It's the smallest lot on the south side of the street and it's the third-smallest lot on

and it's surrounded by much larger buildings that actually are closer to the street than this structure which has a 20-foot setback. So the overall goal of the project is to capture some unusable space in the attic that is at the back of the structure. and create a new writing studio for the owners. And this is going to be accomplished by raising and unifying the roofs So part of the proposal is to replace existing steep and narrow attic stair. This is like many buildings of this era, you walk in the door and there's a stair from the main floor up to the second floor

And right now there's a very steep and narrow attic stair that is not aligned with this stair. The proposal is to put a new stair from here up There's also a plan to put a small bathroom at the half-story level because they need a tub. They don't have a tub in this house at this point. So we're well aware that the section 2.4.4 and so on states that new roof rafters have to intersect the walls at no more than two feet above the half-story floor level, the finished floor of the half story. That occurs everywhere

and compliance except at the if you can see it in this back corner here that's the only place With the current design, it's almost impossible to do. And that's where our hardship variance of what we request is applied to. It's about 18 feet in length. and it's hardly visible from the street itself. So this gives you an idea of the existing height The new height would be about two feet higher. There are two shed dormers visible from the street. The slope of the new roof

would match what it is now, which is at about 10 to 12 ratio. Whereas the dormers would be about 3 to 12 and these are set back four foot nine inches from the front gable so everything except for that back portion does conform to The Zoning By-law as it stands. If we go to the east facade, You can see there are two dormers on the east facade. One, this is what we saw from what you see from the street and this is in the back section And what we're doing is raising the roof all the way back so that the eave line is continuous and the ridge line is continues as opposed to how this one is lower right now.

When you look from the back, this is what exists with the lower roof here. And this is we would see with the proposed design and this right here is where The eave is higher and doesn't come down to two feet distant from the half-story floor. This is about seven foot six or so high at this point. And that allows this roof, and I'll show you in 3D in a second, this roof can be continuous it's in The plane is here for the width of the back portion and then it continues beyond until it gets to this next shed dormer which we saw on the right side when we were looking at it from the street.

So you see here that the... Here's the one we saw from the street, which is longer. And it's not a Shedd dorm but here is the area where the variance is needed in order to make this design happen. And you can also see we have two projecting porches that are part of the scheme as well and it's my understanding that this has been in review for some time with the planning staff. And so everything, I think we've met the requirements of every of all the components that are part of this design except for this 18-foot section. And so what you see here, this provides an architectural integrity that I think adds to

The dignity of this home, where the ridge goes from the street side all the way to the south to the very back portion. And this is where you see where the roof cannot go all the way down in order to basically have this wall carry the roof load down below to the foundation. It's more clearly seen here. So this is the primary roof that extends from front to back And this is where you see the roof. It can't come all the way down in order to either provide access, but primarily because this load needs to go down structurally to the foundation.

So, it's our belief that all of this is in harmony with the stated aesthetic intent and purpose of the ordinance. And then keeping within neighborhood residential district Not only the aspirations, but the historical and architectural vocabulary is consistent with what is in the neighborhood residential district. And this is why we are requesting relief in the form of a variance just for this 18 lineal feet of the back roof. So any questions you might have from the materials I've submitted or anything I've shown you, happy to try to answer.

Okay, thank you. First off we're going to open it up to the public to see if there's anybody attending the meeting tonight that would like to speak for pro or con. Could we open it up for the public talk?

This is Kit. I see one member of the audience with their hand raised. If I could have Lexi pull up the timer?

Sorry, my computer's spazzing. One second.

Okay, there we go. I'm going to allow Emma Stellman to speak and if you could just state your name and address for the record that would be great. You should be able to unmute now.

Can you hear me? Yes. Great, my name is Emma Stellman I live at 3 Wallace Street and Literally a kitty corner to Sharon and Whispering Deer. And if we reach our hands over the fence, we can touch each other. And I want to just... As a neighbor, we sat down together around my kitchen table and got to see all of the... All of the plans and I just wanted to say that um i'm in agreement with um uh it's a gorgeous house. It keeps with this neighborhood we've known the last two tenants there for Thank you so much for joining us.

Add wonderful things to our neighborhood and we hope that this passes. Thank you for hearing me out.

And anybody else?

This is Kit. I see no one else with their hand raised. Okay.

I'd like to leave it open just for another few minutes while we get with the board, see what their comments are. So I've just had a quick question. The drums aren't in front of us tonight at all, are they? Lexi?

Yeah, the owners. This is Sharon in Whispering Deer. We are right here. I can put my video on. Did you say the owners or the dormers?

The owners. Oh, yes. They're right there whispering in here. Yeah, and I want to know if the dorm... are in front of us tonight for approval at all. No, right? The dorms. Right.

No it's just that side portion.

Okay. All right good. All So does anybody on the board have some questions for the architect or the applicants? Any questions at all, you guys? Yes, I see Olivia has a hand up. And now Zach as well both.

Olivia, go ahead. Thank you, Madam Chair. I think this is pretty straightforward and it reminds me of a case we saw relatively recently with, I think, a similar challenge I see no issue with it, but I am just curious if you all have engaged with the other abutters nearby.

We haven't yet, but... We have not yet, but we can.

I'm asking the Lexi did we hear from anybody? Did you get any emails or anything on this case?

This is Kit. I can answer that. I did not receive anything into the zoning board email as far as public comment. I don't know if Lexi got anything as part of their application. Okay. I also didn't get anything.

Olivia, does that satisfy you? Yes, thank you. Thank you. Zach Zaremba please.

Thank you. I have a question for the architect, Mr. Hurd. And you may have said this so bear with me if you're repeating it but is there any concern changing of the shadowing over the adjacent properties? well no because they are much higher than this property right but with the new height I don't is there any concern with that just because it's going to be there's no change in that with the shadowing even though they're they're higher

No change on other properties, you mean? Right. No. No effective change at all because it's so much lower than the others surrounding homes.

Well, even though the properties next door might be lower, the height could affect other floors on their building. They're saying the building's taller. That's what Mr. Zaremba is trying to make you understand. The building next to it could be higher, but however the sun comes in doesn't affect them at all even on the first or second floor.

You know, it's a two-foot difference basically what we're talking about. So it would be minimal just as I would see it.

Satisfied with that?

Thanks.

Thank you. I don't have any questions, I think it's a pretty building. I was just double checking about the size of the shed dormers they look pretty big and I thought They might be a little too big, but that's not for us right now. So I think it's fine. I don't see a problem with it. But now we have to go through the narrative on the hardship variants for the three criteria. Okay? Sure. So everybody, we got our packets. So you've got them right there in front of you. I was explaining away, you know, his hardship variants. Have you read them all? Are we pleased with the... Amens.

Zach, have you looked into this? We are clerking tonight.

I read them. I think there's Zachary. I know at our last meeting we had something similar where it was pretty clearly stated so we felt that we didn't need to rehash it but I can just do a summary for the record if you'd like.

Okay. Yeah, and what about Olivia? Are you okay with everything as well? And Cecilia? I am too, but just for the record, I would like it just highlighted to get it into the record where we're on tape. Olivia, where are you? Sorry.

I'm happy to summarize it. Okay. And then if anybody wants to add anything, you can go ahead.

You're okay with it? And where's Cecilia? Madam Chair, I'm right here. Okay. Are you okay with the... criteria that Mr. Hurd put in the packet and Jack's just going to highlight a couple of things so it'll be on the record okay everybody on same board okay great thank you Mr. Zaremba go ahead please

So the three criteria of special circumstances, substantial hardship and public interest. For special circumstances about the property there's unique site geometry Dating to around 1900, it's a small lot of about 2,500 square feet which features a two-story rear mast set six feet back which is unusual in that neighborhood and among the smallest lots. Substantial financial hardship to comply with the zoning criteria would require pretty complex architectural changes that would likely be much more expensive including increased construction costs. and then finally, we heard from one of the neighbors that they don't have an issue with it. The planning board doesn't state that they think there's any detriment to the public good It seems that it's going to make the house look better and make it more practical.

Beautiful, thank you very much. So without further ado Are we ready to vote? Yes. Okay. Mr. Zaremba, would you make a motion please?

I'd like to make a motion to approve the hardship variance for 22 Park Avenue, ZP26-000035.

And we're going to encompass whatever was put in our packets, the narrative and all the architectural schemes.

and um here Fontano sorry um I don't think you closed the public comment yet unless I missed it no I did not thank you so much

So, Kit, do we have anybody out there? One more last call, please. There are no hands raised in the audience. Beautiful. Great. Thank you. So without further ado... We're taking the vote as we go along. All in favor, please say aye. Opposed, say no. Olivia Mobay? Yes. Sisia Daglian? Aye. Dax, Zaremba.

Aye.

And Sousa Fontano, aye. Let the record show that all four members here this evening voted in the affirmative and the motion carries. Good luck everybody. Thank you so much. We really appreciate the consideration. Thank you. Thank for signing in. Next on our agenda is Thank you all. Thank you. Good presentation. 17th Monmouth Street. Again, this is a new case this evening and clerked He will open it up for us.

Thank you, Manager. I'm going to open 17 Malmuth Street ZP26-000043 The Law Office of Richard G Gerolamo seeks a special permit for a lot split on a property listed on the National Register of Historic Places in the Neighborhood Residence Zoning District as required by SCO 10.1.1 D

Thank you. Oh, there she is. Ms. Vigorito, good evening. Good evening all.

Attorney Ann Vigorido 424 Broadway Somerville Massachusetts here this evening on behalf of 17 Monmouth. I would ask at this time that Will Chalifant from Casa Design be promoted as a panelist. He's our architect and he will be sharing. Some drawings, renderings I should say. I'll be very brief because the board may have more questions and they don't want to necessarily listen to my answers Boring them, but just a little background about this property. So my client purchased this property I'd say a couple of months back. Prior to that the city of Somerville owned this property for 50 plus years and Hmm. More specifically, it was owned by the Housing Authority. I did have a conversation with Joseph Macaluso who is the director of the Housing

in a part-time position now but he was able to give me a lot of good background uh it was used as a group home for a number of years however The property hasn't really been used since prior to COVID so maybe 2019-ish, 2018 he wasn't really... Exactly, sure. So and I don't want to sound fresh but it's a little bit of an eyesore in that neighborhood. I've walked this neighborhood myself The owner has, you know, talking to neighbors. There's several renovated homes. There are some Greek revival homes in the area. on the actual street I mean we're here this evening for approval for a lot split normally uh this is because it's in a national historic district you know normally if it wasn't We wouldn't even be bothering you with this. So that's why we are here.

We were before the historical commission back in June of this year, they did make some recommendations and you know the uh recommendation of staff is to deny this you know lot split and our contention is We love to work with the board and of course staff. The sticking point here is there's a big bay window, Historical really likes this window quite a bit. However, saving the window could be We really don't see it as an option for this project. I am going to ask that Will Shalafat from CALSA you know discuss why that's not feasible and I'll tell you a little bit more about the project what our proposal is uh you know this is something that it you know we're going to generate quite a

I'm not sure if any of the members of the ZBA were able to see this house, but it's in disarray. I have my own concerns. It's been secure by my client, but this is a project that we'd like to see him get started much sooner than later. So I'm going to mute myself now and... Will is going to take over. He's going to show you some renderings and he's going explain why it's not feasible to save the bay window in this project. Thank you.

Thank you, Anne. Good evening, Madam Chair and members of the board. Nice to see all of you again. My name is Will Chalfant from KDI Architects here in Somerville. As Anne mentioned, we are looking to split this existing large lot on Monmouth Street which is a really great street sort of in the middle of Spring Hill. A lot of great old homes on here This being one of them, unfortunately, as Attorney Vigorato mentioned, this one's fallen into a bit of disrepair. But the good news is we are looking to salvage this property, so this home rather. So just to familiarize everyone quickly from 10,000 feet if you will looking at the lot. The existing home falls here on the left and then the right hand side there's a large swath of asphalt pavement and some sporadic trees. Obviously, the property hasn't been occupied in quite some time so it's fallen into a bit of disrepair. So real quickly you know the home is from 1896

City has owned over about 50 years. The existing roof is in quite bad shape, which I'll get into briefly. Aboff, As you can see this house does have some great details. Some of which have been removed. Some of them are still there. I just point to my cursor over here, this is the bay window in question and I'd like to clarify that it's It's not necessarily that we feel that this bay window being removed is going to make for a better project in the whole, and I'll get into that momentarily. It also kind of goes down to the zoning regulations and what we can do here to redevelop this. But I do think it's notable to point out that we do want to salvage this building and bring it back to life.

So just some quick interior photos. As Attorney Vigorito mentioned, it was used as a boarding house. It was sort of broken up for efficiency reasons to create more bedrooms There are some very odd bathrooms. There's one that's about 15 feet square. There was a lot of clearly, you know, as things were needed added including fire suppression systems which are running crisscross throughout the ceilings in places. And again, a lot of that detail you wouldn't see drop ceiling at an 1896 mansion like this was at one time. So on the upper level The roof, as we were referring to it. As you can see there's not a lot of habitable space up here due to some of the dormer depths and just there's a lot disrepair. There's a lotta water damage from over the years But we're looking to put an entire new roof on this and try to mimic some of the detailing on there. The real issue here obviously is the bay.

That's the bay in question, so we're proposing to effectively split this lot Slightly to the right of this bay, the removal of the bay allows us to not create a nonconformity from zoning standpoint. So if we were to keep the bay, it would create a one foot seven setback on that side which we'd then be back before you for that variance. So we're sort of trying to limit those variances while also removing a portion of the building is in quite a bit of disrepair. It is a nice element. There's 10 windows in that bay. None of them are in good shape, so the cost to replicate what's there Thank you for joining us.

So the plan moving forward, we're hopeful is to split this lot and sort of create a little bit of a community within itself. As I mentioned, this is probably one of the few houses if only house on the street that hasn't been thoughtfully brought back to life and renovated. We think that this would be a real benefit to the neighborhood, but as part of this we're proposing a rear addition with parking for the three units we plan on putting in the existing house. We are then proposing a new three family here on the front. and then a rear backyard cottage. All units will have a parking space, and we also have an additional visitor's space as well as a large green space which doesn't really exist now because of the way that the property has been maintained. The idea here is to, you know we're in the NR zoning district which obviously only allows for smaller neighborhood scale buildings.

so this house being you know obviously it's a beautiful big house but it's sort of in general a bit out of character with some of the Somerville lots which obviously we know is a very dense city So we don't think that this is really out of character with the existing street or much of the city. And I think... What we're proposing is very appropriate and we feel it would be a real benefit to the neighborhood. So I do have an image of what the proposed development would look like. So the existing house, we are proposing to change that roof style. We're still working through design options on that but the idea is bring a mansard here to create more space up on that level and then sort of mimic that in the new building here and then the backyard cottages to the rear so that That central driveway would service all three of those buildings. It's an existing curb cut, we're not looking to change that. We wouldn't be adjusting any street parking numbers or anything like that.

and we think the way that we've sort of treated unfortunate addition in the past, we're trying to give new life to that and something that would be attractive and be a feature rather than right now what appears to be a clear Add-on from another time. So with that, I will leave it to the board for any...I'm here to answer any questions or anything you'd like to know

Thank you so much. We will ask for the public portion to be opened, please.

This is Kit. If you would like to speak as part of this application, please raise your hand now. I also just want to note for the applicant and the board that to pass this application this evening would require all four votes of the board. It's not just a simple majority for a special permit, so I just wanted to note that. Thank you. Um, I currently do not see anyone with their hand raised. All right well we'll

talk to the board and uh if somebody should pop up let me give a holler I see someone with their hand raised now sorry all right that's good um i'll just ask Lexi to bring up the timer again

Okay, I'm going to allow Thomas Bent to speak. If you could just state your name and address for the record, you'll be given two minutes. You should be able to unmute now.

Okay, thank you. My name is Tom Bent. I live at 3 Habit Place, Somerville, which is basically an extension across Habit Street of Marmot Street. I wasn't able to... I was on vacation when they noticed I was out for the original... proposal on this so it's the first time I'm seeing it um I don't really have an issue other than trying to say because I believe that bay window is a stained glass window and before uh The Housing Authority had that. That was a nursing home and then I think before that it was like the architect said, a mansion. There's a lot of great characteristics inside that building. The only concern I have is it looks like you're going to put three units in the existing building. You're going extend to the back of that, then you're gonna put a 3-decker basically beside it and then a single unit in the back so

That's going to go to seven units in that area where there hasn't been a lot of traffic. Monmouth is technically a private way, I believe. And I just, you know, I think it looks great. Uh, I don't have any issues with the bay window as long as it could be maybe restored somewhere else in the house. And I do, I agree with him on that front addition. It'd be great if just the porch could go back and the addition can come off but it actually looks pretty good with the way they have rendered it. But my general concern is that's a lot of units in that area and it's a pretty quiet street so But that's really it. I don't have any opposition to what they want to do tonight Thank you, Mr.

Bent Thank you

This is Kit. I do not see anyone else with their hand raised currently. Okay, so we'll move along and come back.

So there's our rendering. Anybody have a comment they want to make? I think it's very attractive. One, okay, couple of hands. Beautiful. Cecea?

I wanted to know whether the roof change on this The historic building was being done by right. Like all the other changes that you're showing here, whether those were being done

So long as our demolition percentage is under 50%, which in our calculations it is because we're saving almost every other aspect of the building, I believe it is by right.

And did you say that Curved Bay was added at some later time? Do you have evidence it was?

No, I'm sorry. I misspoke. I was speaking about the front edition here.

Oh, okay.

This was clearly added at another time as was this portion back here. But no, that bay is certainly original. One thing I apologize it's still your floor.

No and finally have you I mean, I know this would be a little bit of a kick in things but have you considered jogging your property line around the bay and whether you can still get three units on the side there?

Yeah, so we have looked at that and I think if that's the only option I think we could explore that because we understand... The Bay is something the historical folks would like to keep. The building type, I don't have the zoning in front of me. I should but I believe the minimum width for a triple decker is 24 feet and we're right now at 28 feet so we could shrink slightly uh It's going to make things a little tight. Honestly, part of the reason we did this was for circulation reasons and if that bays here I think Aboff,

you know I think then you're looking at notching the back half of this building off really to accomplish that and it gets a bit tight so that's one of the drivers on that was really sort of from a safety you know Safety may be a bit of extreme word, but just circulation access. And then the other thing is we're only allowed I think a max setback in this district 10 or so feet well it might be 20 feet so I apologize if I misspoke there but I don't think this bay is going to be seen really uh this is For the most part, I know it is two-way but I think predominantly people are traveling up the hill this way down the street and I think this house being where it is you would have to be in the driveway to even see this bay.

I don't disagree that it's a nice element, but I don t feel like this is removal of a beautiful pediment in the front of the house that s going to be seen regardless. I guess the long way of answering that question is we have looked at it. We wanted to make sure that didn't trigger an additional variance as far as shrinking Thank you. Olivia?

Thank you, Madam Chair. My question was similar about the decision to choose a 42 feet wide lot on the right hand side of our page here. I understand that the goal is to maximize the space that you all are building there. but given the recommendation from the historic commission and the seeming feasibility of being able to move that line while still making this work albeit tight You know I question the requirement to really constrict ourselves and eliminate the bay as an option given you know the point in design we are which is you know a lot doesn't even exist at this point. I don't have a question at this point, I guess. I'm just seconding.

Sure. I guess if I may, Madam Chair, respond to that. Yep. I understand exactly what you're saying, but we also have a lot of elements that we have to make work here as far as that backyard cottage requires a dedicated walkway. There are all these things that add up to a point where Yes, we could narrow this entirely but it has to still function and be you know I know the board doesn't necessarily care about finances on this but you know this is sat like this for over 15 years. and I think the city never chose to do anything with this. I think we have someone who's looking to revitalize a house, and yes there could be some concessions as part of that but I think in the long term This is more of an addition to the neighborhood and community than a decaying building that has been like that for quite some time. Zach Zaremba

Yeah, this isn't a question. It's a statement. So I actually do care about the finances because I'm aware of them and I think The fact that they're taking a house that's been essentially abandoned for this many years, rehabbing it and then adding another triple-decker in the back. Actually, it's aligned with Summer Vision for 2040 and creating new residences. I mean, the staff memo says it's not in line with it. I don't really agree with that. I understand they want to preserve the historical integrity of it, but this is a... I know this is going to be a very capital-intensive project and they need to maximize the space in order to make it feasible and take that risk on. And I don't want to make a horror for developers unnecessarily to build here To keep a bay window that's not really even that visible now. It's facing a parking lot, there's a large building behind it and now when they put a new property on the lots but it's probably to anybody walking by going to be even less prominent if it was there especially if that's going to

The driveway to get into the parking in the back. So, you know, I like that window and I prefer to keep it but I understand why they want to get rid of it and I'm inclined to just allow the special permit and also help them avoid coming back to us with other non-conformities later if they had to keep a

Thank you. Sisia, Daglian.

I had another thought which and This might not be possible, but you're trying to do seven units on this property, correct? So is it possible to do it without a lot split and have An addition to this existing building in the back that's sort of like a horizontal bar, you can't make that work with the zoning?

No.

Unfortunately not. Because of the form-based...

Exactly. Yes, because we could, you know, like the rear edition is effectively that in addition to dormers and things like that. The only way we can add square footage now we could do a rear edition with a side edition but those do have parameters that you're just not going to get the square footage and then it'll also, you know, you can't have more than well I guess you're saying it would be one footprint right? You're saying like a big L or something?

Yeah. Have you tested that at all?

It's a fraction of the square footage that we would get because those additions can only be two stories in height. So it would be a somewhat awkward looking addition. It would sort of be... I think in order to make it functionally look okay, would have to be really almost in stark contrast to the historical nature of house because if it's this long and sort of linear shape because we can't have a third floor. If we could have a 3rd floor on those, I think maybe it could work but I don't think it's really feasible. I'd have to look into the zoning more Look at that as a viable option.

I'm sorry, Madam Chair, if I could. You know, I'm listening and you know, let's please everybody if we can. A crowd pleaser and you know we have various comments and you my thought is maybe we should continue this to the next meeting and maybe the team you know Will, myself, the rest of the team, the owner can as we've listened to these comments take a look and then when we come back Well, this is what we've seen from the comments. We could do this or we can't do this. I don't want to misspeak. Like Will just said, we probably have to take a look at the code

Actually, the NR only allows for three units on a person. So we could never achieve the seven that we're trying to achieve now just for that reason alone.

But board member Daglian made some other comments before that. So, you know, I thought maybe we could look at those.

Licia, did you want to comment back to the attorney?

You know, you don't necessarily have to continue. I think I'm satisfied with your answers and at this point my thinking is along the lines of What Zach has commented on.

All right, thank you. I just wanted to say that I think that's a nice area and I know one of the neighbors, Mr. Bent mentioned about the traffic but you know we're trying to go forward in Somerville to give more housing and I think this really it's so fashionable. It's very nice, it's very attractive up in that area as well. I think that it wouldn't Thank you. It wouldn't produce that much more traffic because these aren't big apartments that you can have all kinds of people sharing the rooms like some of the old houses, like my house. I could rent it out to all kinds Borders, and that have all kind of like 15 cars here. But this year I think is very well done. I think they don't look like modern new houses. I

I like the idea of the driveway. It's like a right in, right out. This side's open. I like it and I'd go for it. And I understand I was on historic preservation for many, many years but That window would be hidden on the side. It would be different if it was in the front, and I like what they did with the front portion, the addition with all the windows. So I think they're trying to rejuvenate what's old and add some new things. and I like it. I'm ready to vote tonight for it. Olivia, your hand is up miss.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I was going to second what Mr. Zaremba said as well. You know, you know conserving already established areas of detached and semi-detached residential buildings, of which this does seem like one. But the purpose of the NR code is indeed to permit the development of one, two and three unit detached and semi-detached residential units on individual lots. And this does provide that ability while also Fixing a building that has been unoccupied for quite a while. I do still really think it would be great if we keep the window, but from what everyone is saying about it being on the side and less visible I'm willing to approve this tonight given the intent of the zoning code.

Okay, thank you. One more comment to kit staff Are there anybody in the audience raising their hand?

This is Kit. I do not see anyone else in the Okay, thank you.

So we're going to close the public portion. I was going to just say it sounds like we're ready to vote. What does Ann Vigorito want us to do? Shall we take that vote, Ms. Vigorio?

Yes, thank you Madam Chairwoman. Like I said, I was just inquiring for the board. No, I get it.

Yeah, that's fine. Thank you for the consideration. So where is our clerk? Mrs. Zaremba?

Thank you.

Make a motion and so this is for a special permit.

So we're going to be voting to approve the special permit

Correct.

Okay, I make a motion to vote to approve the special permit for 17 Monmouth Street ZP26-000043

I second. Seconded by, who was that? Olivia? Yes. Thank you, Olivia. And incorporating all the staff report and other materials we have from July 31st, 2026. So as we go around, all in favor please say aye. Let's start with Olivia. Aye. Stacia? Aye. Zach? Aye And Susan I say aye Let the record show that all voting members tonight created a quorum, voted in positive to pass. Thank you. Good luck with the project. Thank you to everyone. Have a great evening. We appreciate your help. Okay, so let me see if that's it I think. Let me double check my agenda here.

So I didn't forget and we closed the meeting because I do these little things you guys keep me honest. Good job tonight, Zach. We'll see Miss Olivia the next meeting. And don't forget we're going to do the Mass General Law and the Jurisdictions for the Zoning at the next meeting. Does anybody else have any other comments for tonight or questions, comments, suggestions, anything? Nope.

I have a quick question for the Zoning Board. Is there any progress with finding a new member or is it going to drag out?

I asked that today. Kit?

Did we have somebody leave? Ann Fullerton left as she moved out of Somerville at the end of July. Yeah, so she moved to a different city so she had to unfortunately resign. um but I'm gonna work with the clerk's office to get someone to get this advertised and hopefully we'll have someone soon. I know the summer can be hectic but uh I'll give you guys an update when I have one but yeah we're gonna

If somebody moves, they need to resign immediately. There's no ramp up period.

Yeah, you have to be living in Somerville. Unfortunately, there's no grace period.

So in theory, if somebody were to move now, it would put the zoning board in kind of a tough spot.

Yes, so we're going to... We have two people out tonight.

You know, which is a little unusual. And when you guys like I've said this before any of you know vacations and business trips are coming up stuff like that we've got to speak up as soon as possible um Zach's very good with that with his job and he has to go out of town and uh you know I'm going to be out. I mean, I'm usually not out and I've been out so it's we got to keep each other's backs and try and do the right thing and you know talk through The Office with Kit. And she'll always, you know, keep us in line. Something might come up and I say, gee, maybe I feel like doing that the next meeting. But if you're no tool going to be out then you don't do it. It's a responsibility and avoid it Sometimes it can't, it's just the way it goes. But so yeah, so Ann Fullerton's gone and I think she was outstanding. You all are but I think it's a small enough board that when one I took people out, it makes a difference in coverage.

you know fortunately this last these two cases tonight we were all on the same page you know everything went well they had the answers for the questions we had um there weren't people from the neighborhoods Anti, you know that's another big factor. You have a group of people that are really against the project it throws a monkey wrench in the works for us because we have to pay attention all of that give that consideration so um Thank you, CCF for commenting. Zach, the same thing. We love questions, don't you? All right, everyone. Good night you all.

Wait, I need to close up.

Oh see, I knew you'd get me on something tonight. Alright Zach, go ahead.

Alright, I make a motion to end tonight's CBA meeting.

Second. All in favor say aye. Sisia Daglian? Aye. Susan Fontano, aye. Zach Zaremba? Aye and Olivia Mobay Bye. You got it. Thank you everyone, thank you to staff. Always a good job thanks Kit and see you all day after voting day. All right. See you later, guys. Good night.