Somerville Zoning Board of Appeals 10-01-2025

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the City of Somerville's Zoning Board of Appeals for Wednesday, October the 1st, 2025. It is 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 video recording of these proceedings will be available on the city website's meeting and events page, or by emailing zoningboard at somervillemass.gov. Tonight joining us from your board is Anne Brockleman. She's our vice chair. Brian Cook, he's gonna be our acting clerk this evening. And we have Anne Fullerton, Zach Zaremba, Sisia Daglian, and I'm Susan Fontano, your chair. Also tonight joining us from Planning, Preservation and Zoning are staff members Kit Luster and Steve Carey. So without further ado, I'd like us to call up this under public hearings, our first case, 876 Broadway. JoAnne Hanrahan, Of the parties of 870 872 broadway I correct myself i'm sorry 872 broadway is miss vigorito I sees lighting up hello.

Good evening, Chairwoman. Attorney Anne Vigorito from 424 Broadway, Somerville. Could you also promote Philip Sima? He is the architect, so he'll be joining me this evening. We do have the applicants, but I don't know if you necessarily have to promote them. They can speak if you'd wish. Whatever is the pleasure of the board.

I have one quick question. I believe

uh back in the day we opened this case already so we don't have to open it tonight uh staff personnel would you advise me of that uh this is steve carey i uh this i think should be uh should be opened um i don't know who was open before but i do know we did re-advertise this um so i think it should be just considered a new public hearing and um should be should be reopened fantastic mr cook would you be so kind

Larry Paxton, Yes, Madam chair, I would like to open the cases of 872 Broadway zp 25000064 and zp 25000065. These seek hardship variances, one for relief from Somerville Zoning Ordinance Section 243D5 to allow mechanical equipment in the frontage area of a lot and 000065. uh for relief from ground story primary facade fenestration requirement sco section 418 d for a general building in the mid-rise 3 mr3 zoning district thank you very much miss uh so we have philip us and ian who'd like to go first

Madam Chairwoman, if I could, I will begin and I will be very brief. Our presentation is relatively brief. Just to give you a little bit of a history or a background. I was before you back in August on a similar situation. It happens to be the same development team, different architects, but similar situation. In a nutshell, this is about a front mounted transformer. But a little background, back in November of 2021, myself and the development team were before the planning board and we were granted a special permit and site plan approval to construct a three-story net zero ready building. It's 12 units with 20% being affordable. And in the midst of construction, there were some issues that arose with Eversource where the transformer could no longer be where it was originally approved. It is now in the front of the building. There's a mural and it's encased. And just to give you A little brief history, I think it was back in August I was here, we had that similar situation with encasing and murals on the transformer. But Philsema has a timeline of what occurred because once relief is granted, you know, the architect kind of takes the front seat and, you know, drives the train working. with building permits and so forth. So he has a timeline. He also has plans. He will show you, you know, what the current situation of what the front of what the transformer on the pad in the front looks like. And it's not very long. So once we're done with that, you know, whatever the board pleasure is, if there's questions and, you know, other concerns, the developer development team is here as well. And they can answer some questions. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Thank you. Thank you. And I would just ask that Phil Seaman now begin.

Well, good evening, everyone. Thanks for taking the time. I'll share. Oops. Can I please have access to share the screen?

This is Kit. You should be all set now.

Thanks so much. Um, so up on the screen, we have two images. So the image on the left was what was approved. And ultimately the image on the right is where we ended up today with the building being constructed. Um, the history of the project was that originally, um, The transformer was designed to go in the back of the property. You can see on the adjacent property there is an existing transformer. There was a negotiation with the Director Butter to use the existing driveway, which would be an access easement for that transformer and our proposed transformer to locate it in the back. At some point during the design process, no agreement could be reached with the abutter. At that point, we pivoted to having a manhole transformer located in the front that would be flush with the grade, still have an impact on the building, but would still allow for the fenestration on that ground floor. And then again, you wouldn't have that mechanical equipment in the frontage area for the facade. So we got this approved by Eversource to have a manhole transformer here. This is a draft from Eversource showing how they've connected it to their utilities and infrastructure. And through that process, while we're waiting, this was kind of during COVID and there was supply shortages. Basically, Eversource could not give us any time, which they'd get a manhole transformer. This is quite common for a lot of projects during this time. They said it could be one year, it could be three years, but we cannot give you any timeline. At that point, the project was close to being completed. So, um, you know, our clients worked with Eversource to come up with a solution, which was a pad mounted transformer in that same location, um, where the manhole transformer was. So the requirements for pad mounted transformers are there can't be any fenestration, no windows. And everything within five feet has to be a three-hour rated non-combustible construction. So that is the reason for how the windows on there essentially disappeared, kind of dictated by this mechanical equipment requirement. So plan above is what was originally proposed, original design of the building. Plan below shows how that building was notched out. to account for the minimum clearances that Eversource requires away from the building. They agreed to four feet, and then again, a three-hour rated assembly directly abutting it. We had already had a column in the building, so that column needs to be three-hour rated as well. You'll see that in some of the photos. So again, obviously, there's a clear sky requirement. that we worked out with Eversource. That notch is away, again, still at the building on the upper floors. Then you're seeing again the before original one and where it ended up. That has an impact on the roof deck as well. Here we're seeing the original facade, the fenestration, meaning I forget what it is, 80 percent, 90 percent required glazing on the retail frontage. And then where you end up without glazing at that location. And then some type of mechanical screen in front of it was proposed. There's a mechanical screen that's installed now. And we'll see an image of that in the photo. And then again, it has a small impact. I mean, obviously you lose the balconies, but it has an impact on the side. So that's what the side elevation looked like before. That's what it looks like now. and that calculation where we're kind of dropping from 70% down to 60% or 59.5. Actually, yeah, on that ground floor level. So this is a rendering that was used, I think, during the planning board review. This is a photo of the project. So you can see the mechanical screen that was installed here and the balconies that are no longer for those two units up there. Just some additional photos of what it looks like. And then this is the current enclosure for it, as well as that column that's coming down. The three-hour rated assembly is over here. And then the column was wrapped, which, in my opinion, looks kind of a little bit better than the mechanical screen. But yeah, I think I'll just leave it at that. And that's where we ended up.

Thank you, Phil. Madam Chairwoman, we also have Mr. Dolan, who is from Eversource, who can speak to some of the occurrences during the building permit phase of this project, if the board would be inclined to hear from him.

I don't see why not. They're the ones that are dictating what really has to go on.

Completely agree. I just wanted to make sure the board would be okay with it. His name is Ernie Dolan. I don't know if you have to promote him as a panelist so that he can speak.

This is Kit. And Lon has his hand raised, so I'm going to promote him. I don't see an Ernie Dolan, but I do see a 781 phone number, if that could be him as well.

I have a feeling, sorry to interrupt, that may be him. My concern is he may not be able to turn on a camera. And if he's addressing the board, I know we'd like to have him to be able to turn on a camera.

I'll go ahead and I'll just do a loud to talk. Thank you. I appreciate that. Okay, he should have unmuting capabilities now.

Hi, how are you? Good evening. Hi, how you doing?

Good, good.

I just I just wanted to clarify. So Ernie has a company where he's an energy consultant. And he worked for Eversource for like 25 years. Now he has his own company where he helps builders with these transformer issues. And so he helped us on this. And I don't know if he's If he's raised his hand or if he's here, but, uh, that, that is his position. Do we, do we see him in the audience or do I need to find Ernie? Cause it would be interesting just to hear from him how, if anyone's interested on the politics behind some of these things that he's told us.

This is Kit. Um, phone number, people who are phoning in can dial star six to unmute, I believe.

Well, if we haven't heard from Ernie, that's okay. But I think, I mean, Phil said it correctly. This is not something we wanted to do. We had multiple meetings with Nick Antovica. We had the vault in the ground, which, you know, just to put that in the ground is very expensive, the beautiful windows on. And Eversource told us, if you want power to the building, it's going to take two years. I said, that's ridiculous. And so, you know, we had to make a decision. We can't sit and wait on it two years. So we had to dig up the vault. We had to move the front wall back six feet and take out the window. And it was, it was, it wasn't, you know, it was very expensive to do. And so it was, it wasn't something we wanted to do. And, uh, Yeah, that was the situation. I even tried, the neighbor has got a transformer right on our property line. It's big enough to where we could share it and nobody would let us share it. I don't understand it. It's in Phil's picture, the one in the back. I don't know if you want to show that again, Phil. There's a transformer right in the back of the neighbors because that's where the subway shop and everything is. And I don't see any reason why we couldn't have shared that transformer. And where is it? Yeah, right there. So it's circled in the red. That's the transformer for the neighbor in between the two properties. That's for the subway shop and all the restaurants. We should have been able to share that, but no. And there's plenty of power for both buildings. I just don't know why that. Anyway, so we couldn't. So we had to do our own and then we had to and we paid eighty four thousand dollars for a transformer. It's a ridiculous price. And then they made us take it out and put in another one. And, you know, and Sue, just say, no, madam chairman, this is, this should be the last one. I know we did 3 79. I knew this was coming up and I was going to tell you at the last meeting, then I was like, oh, I don't want to bring it up, but the, the, There's, we don't have any other situations like there's all the feature projects. We were able to get in ground transformers, Eversource made a deal with South Korea. So they're buying faulted transformers from South Korea now. And, and so we're able to get in ground transformers now.

Oh, good. Yeah. Cause I was worried myself about how we're going forward. You know, what we would do is we keep marching on and new buildings are coming on board, you know? So that's interesting that Verizon, Eversource has done that.

Yeah. So we won't see this problem anymore with the moving them or having to put in a pad mount because they do have the equipment now.

And what was the concern about not having it screen and just have a mural on it? What was the preference in the screen?

I liked it with just the historical wrap. I did a cool picture of Tufts University from like the 1800s. It's nice, the horses. And then the planning and zoning told us we had to screen it.

Oh, planning and zoning told you that?

Yeah.

Oh, okay. All right. I should be asking them then.

This is Steve Carey. I can just say that it is a... screening of transformers is a is a zoning requirement yeah all over or is this in front of certain buildings i believe anytime there's uh mechanical equipment that would be visible from the right-of-way but i can look up the specific language okay because i see them all through the city you know on different corners and stuff by the library and

JoAnne Hanrahan, You know, certain things, and I just didn't realize it, it was because this was residential or as opposed to commercial or you know what i'm saying I should know it, but I don't so that's interesting okay so.

Mark Warren, I could just. Mark Warren, Just pop it again, it does look like the color that was calling in the maybe the person from our source may be unmuted now, so we may be able to speak. Great.

JoAnne Hanrahan, Welcome good evening. Mark Warren, Thank you, how are you guys.

Good. So just state your name and record.

Ernie Dolan from Coastal Palms Nurses.

Okay.

So what can you tell us about this? I guess being part of Eversource, Boston Medicine and staff over 20 years, a lot of politics. And as you mentioned earlier, Due to the equipment shortages and also the, uh, the hindrance of COVID and a lot more, um, entities that were involved with slowing down the actual process of this, it was kind of an uphill battle. And based on my experiences in the company and then kind of working for the customer, I actually come up with a plan to help navigate this whole situation in, in the owner's favor. and obviously satisfy Eversource. So the history of this project was basically the equipment was nil and that's throughout the whole company. And based on these transformers that were supposed to be in a vault, it was an underground vault and there's a certain size they have to get in based on the voltages that feed the building. And they're called 167s. This is like the smallest transformers they're used throughout the whole Eversource territories from south and north shore. They even go on overhead services on poles and everywhere. You'll see them everywhere you look. They're like big Campbell soup cans, if you want to look at that way. Basically, there was none to be found throughout anywhere. Even through getting them overseas, there was just building them. So this became a hindrance, and then it just became pretty much unavailable, even through the different people that I know over in staff through the years, they gave me from inventory to the people that actually audit the equipment. And they were saying there's none around. They do hold a few because of issues that have for emergencies, like hospitals or something that has a critical use to them. So those are the only availability, um, for us as far as getting those to any project at all, no matter what. So they would hold a handful. And politics-wise, you know, it's a multi-billion dollar company. They are a monopoly. So basically, you know, you pay up front and you're not guaranteed, as we still know that. I don't know if everybody knows that, but that's how it works. So the customer pays up front, they take your money, and they put the order in. And based on even without COVID, that's what happens. They usually kind of, based on what they have as a workforce and what's going on, you know, they get to the project when they can. So we're kind of holding the ball out. So my job currently is to navigate these projects to help people get to where they gotta be and not take a financial hardship and other hardships that people trying to move in and have nowhere to live. So I've been in the same shoes on and off as being a representative of Eversource and also being part of the customer care group that help people, you know, navigate their their needs. They have families and lives, too. So that resource can dictate that. So basically, this project was following the line of my expertize is trying to get them to be middle ground. So as you've seen in the diagram, which I don't have to, but it's called an alcohol, it's like a mini cave. Reset into the building that would give the same exact power needs as the transformer that goes on the ground, they are H.A. 300. That means 100 KBA transformers, a set of three to go into the vault. And that goes into the property. And both of these situations are served by a manhole underground, which comes from the street because that's all it's available in the network over there near Tufts. So it is coming in from an underground source. But at the end of the day, and rather than going into an underground vault, we had no choice but to put it into this outcoast situation. which is remedied in the building and could be, you know, disguised, like you mentioned earlier about murals and stuff. So that, that, that, that they paint transformers, they paint all kinds of situations just to make it blend into the site. They don't like to see the ice or either becoming something that's, you know, a nuisance or something that is medically non-pleasing. So I know they will allow that mural or something that be to blend into the, the actual, you know, the navigation of the property itself and how it's going to look aesthetically. So based on all this, this, this kind of overlapping that went on with Eversource and what we did, uh, we actually got approval through Eversource and that was based on because they couldn't get any equipment and they were going to hold us hostage for over a year. So, you know, they, they kind of realized at the end of the day, this isn't right. And they still let us, you know, left us hanging because of their equipment problem. that's you know that's that's the whole thing in a nutshell of what happened out there and how we can kind of get to where we need to go and it isn't taking it you know as far as beyond for what has to be mentioned there but it's something to be done what needed to be done and they had to come up with a solution which they didn't so i came up with a solution which we've done plenty of these throughout boston east boston even cambridge or about it everybody has these so it's not a new idea but They weren't in the, you know, they didn't want to forfeit any of the precious transformers at the time, but after spending a lot of money and taking the needs of their customers, they had to kind of negate it and went forward with our request and still been a nightmare with them. Ongoing up until the end. So as anybody's experienced, whatever source, they're not an easy customer, you know, first people to deal with out there company-wide just to get ahold of people and get answers. So if that helps you get a little feel for what's in the hot pepper that's in this sauce that we got going on. Hello. Hello, everybody.

Susan, you're muted. Oh, sorry. Chair Fontana, you're muted.

Does anybody have any comments or questions they'd like to ask Mr. Dolan on the board? No. Part of my screen's gone. So if you do speak up. No. Okay. All right. So who's next? Ms. Vigorito, who would you like to give us some more information?

So, Madam Clerk, that would be our presentation for this evening. I would now Obviously, turn things over to you, Madam Chairwoman and the board for whatever questions and concerns and information the board may want, because we can always provide that, if not this evening and a future meeting as well. Okay, great.

Kit, we have this letter here from the public. Is there anybody in the public would be planning to ask some questions before we go any further?

This is Kit. I would just ask if anyone would like to provide testimony, just raise your hand and you'll be given two minutes to speak. There's one member of the audience, but they don't have their hand raised.

They don't?

They do not.

Okay. All right. So just for the record, and everybody listening, we did receive a letter from Meredith Porter of September 25th, and it was subject to the tonight's meeting of 872 Broadway. The whole board in its entirety received this, and we all have it in our packet. So thank you out there to Mr. Porter. He also attended the meeting we had a couple of weeks back in person and spoke. So thank you. So I'll leave that open just for a little bit longer, just in case somebody might tune in and have a quick question. Could we clear this screen and let me see the whole board again? Thank you. So I'll open up to the board now for some questions you might have. Remember, be it the architect, uh, the attorney, uh, the. Ever since person, anybody have some questions.

Thank you madam chair my. I don't really have a question. I have a comment. So my issue is that zoning pretty clearly states that transformers are not allowed in the frontage. And whether or not this solution has been acceptable in other communities is not really something that is a concern for Somerville. The concern is that this is the second time in recent history we're contending with a new build with a transformer right in the frontage. um and i know that the applicant stated that they were in touch with isd i'm having a hard time believing that isd didn't flag this at any point saying you know this could be a zoning issue for you um whether or not that happened i think that Sarah Schulte, My biggest concern is that now that we're seeing a trend, whether or not the equipment's now available we're now seeing a trend of of transformer showing up after construction is complete in the frontage I do not want our approvals to be come assumed. as a sort of acquiescence to the failure to comply with zoning.

Right. Thank you. Anybody else? Chair. Yes, Anne Brockleman, please, Vice Chair.

um i have some questions um my understanding from reading the information provided on the transformer being in the back is a bit different from what i'm hearing described here um i guess first and foremost question for sorry mr doley the gentleman before transformers can be shared or they can never be shared between different property owners? Can you answer that? I guess that would be an Eversource question, but to your knowledge.

Hello? Hi. State your name and give your answer, please.

This is Ernie Dolan. Again, initially from Coastal Power Services. And this is relating to the question. Go ahead. Basically, in the past and it is if it's depending on what's needed as far as the abutter and the service, that's kind of a new service that's requested. Yes, it is doable to have that transformer shared by both customers. And with that said, It also depends on the customer that's doing the sharing. So there's a couple factors that are involved with that situation. And also the third body is that Eversource mandates that, meaning that they don't tell the owner of the initial transformer they have to share, but they mandate the load, meaning that if it's applicable for both customers to use that one transformer that you mentioned set in the back. and that was also under the discovery initially with the with with both customers and that that wasn't the case they could not share they didn't have enough power to supply the new service so they had left them with no no other options at all and at that point we we were you know as far as 872 is concerned that we had to go with the next ultimatum which was to go in and get the transformer from Patrick Corbett- The manholes that are involved, which you mentioned earlier that the three transformers they go on the ground, which were were not available and I don't even know if they still have a supply of though that's talking like since 2021 that's how inappropriate this whole situation is for these poor people, but that answers your question.

Debra Kustic- At man. Debra Kustic- Through you. You know, can I ask one thing? I didn't quite understand his answer to you. So in other words, we know that it didn't go in the, uh, in the ground because of the charge of equipment. Now we're saying we want to go up the back and it could have been shared by the primary holder of that transformer. But you're saying that Eversource said that there would not be enough power to go both ways. Is that what you're saying?

Exactly. They couldn't share what they had already because it wouldn't be enough power to give to the new service at 872. Okay.

All right. Thank you. Thank you, Ann. May I continue? Yes, please.

So I think you paraphrased what I was trying to check my understanding. It seemed implied that it was the that the abutter did not want to share, but now we're hearing that there actually is not enough power to share. That was not technically possible through Eversource as opposed to it being how neighborly the abutter wanted to be. The second question, In the project history, and again, tell me if I'm misunderstanding, it seemed like you were counting on not sharing the transformer. I don't think that was mentioned, but sharing the easement, which is the access by Eversource to one or two pads in the back, right? Whether it's one or two. And I'm looking at the plans. You have four feet, the building side, From your property line, which is not enough for a vehicle. I don't know what they're whatever source requires. But is that part of why that was. That's so close to the property line, because you were counting on. Sharing an alley that also did not work out.

Well, and basically there's a 10 foot minimum between the two buildings. So in order to get, there's an issue with that transformer. If it goes out, if they need to replace it, they need to get a truck in there and to get that it's over 500 pounds more, probably a thousand pounds, that transformer. So to get it out, they need an aerial truck to pick it up and then bring it onto the truck and bring another one back in. So. That's your first question, to access. The access is a big issue in getting that in and out. That's the 10 feet between the two buildings that they have to allow to get a bucket truck, they call it, in there and get that moved in and out if they have to in an emergency situation. And based on, I guess, the first question that you mentioned earlier was that that wasn't even considered part of the plan. Originally, we were going to have our own transformer. and they were going to have their transformer. So our transformer was going to be in the street. They called a vault, which is three transformers feeding that service. And that got wiped out because of COVID and not enough equipment. So we took option two of trying to borrow some voltage or some energy from next door to the butter. And they did their study, a load study with Eversource, and they didn't have enough power to supply the new building. So that was out of the question. But the easement situation that you mentioned, that was because of getting in and out of the property if there was an emergency. If we put a transformer, another option was to put it in the back on our own separate property, we couldn't get it in and out of there because there was not enough, I guess, side to side leverage to get our truck in and out of there to get it out of there. So we couldn't make that option work either.

So currently, How much dimension is there between buildings? You're showing four feet from your property line, but is that straight down the middle of the alley? The shared alley?

I believe we're there. I believe what I remembered, I believe we, they're like right, I think the transform was like right against our property line, right on it pretty much. So that's where the cutoff point is from their property, I guess, because that's like a fence, an invisible fence that encroaches our property other than four feet over. So we probably have about five, maybe six or five to seven feet from our building to their transform.

I guess maybe this is a question for the architect or developer. I'm puzzled why knowing you need 10 feet access to the back of the transformer, you put your building footprint not allowing that. So at first I wondered that you had four and the abutter had six, so that equals 10, which would make your plan work. And then I understand that that plan to share the alley or access easement didn't work out. But knowing that you need 10 feet to get to the back for your transformer, wouldn't you put your building 10 feet from the property line? That's what you need. I mean, you would lose, yes, development square footage.

That's not why we didn't do it. Because Eversource approved, they pushed us towards the plan of doing the vaulted transformer in the front. So we had that was the original plan. That's what they signed off on. That's, that's what everyone planned on doing, because it was easier. And, you know, we didn't have to, the neighbor didn't want to give us that easement. And so that's the plan we went with. So it was it was made everyone was happy with it. And it wasn't until they couldn't get equipment that we had this issue.

Okay, thank you timing from a dimensional standpoint. So. There's 10 feet between the buildings that allow for a truck to get to the backyard. And so that's the way it was designed and then. Would have access to that transformer in the rear yard. And again, like Elon just said, no agreement could be reached with the butter to allow that access easement for us to have the transformer, but it was fully compliant with ever source standards to get there. But that agreement fell apart.

Okay, thank you. Anybody else.

Madam chair.

Yes, Brian cook please.

Thank you, Madam chair. Um, my summary of the situation is everybody got what they wanted, except the zoning board, which has to, uh, enforce the zoning ordinance. And we're the ones who have to give, um, and as member Fullerton said, um, I can't keep doing this because even though each case is distinct, we don't set precedents. We only make decisions on cases. It's not viable for a zoning board and a city zoning ordinance to continue to essentially ignore it. because builders and utility companies and whoever else think they can do whatever they can do to satisfy their own requirements. And I don't know what a city is supposed to do under these circumstances. it would be helpful to hear from the planning and zoning staff, their perspective on it, because as a member of a citizen board, I'm flummoxed by the notion that we have to keep giving ground to other considerations and that zoning is somehow the least important priority.

Thank you, Brian.

I'd like to say something if I may.

Please do, Steve.

It's Elon, Madam Chair.

Oh, I'm sorry. I saw him light up. Go ahead.

I mean, we by far did not get what we wanted. So when you say everyone got what they wanted except planning and zoning, that's absolutely incorrect. We had to push the wall back of the building and spend $100,000, remove the window, a beautiful window, which lit up the retail space. So it's not what we wanted at all. We wanted to keep it in the ground, but... do you wait over a year you can't just sit there with an empty building waiting somerville doesn't care though the taxes are you know 80 000 a year they're not going to say oh you don't have to pay us taxes the bank's not going to say oh you don't have to pay us the 30 grand in mortgage every month so you know you gotta you gotta do what you you gotta do what you gotta do and to to make it work and We didn't want to do it. We had meetings with Nick Antovica and everybody in ISD, and we sat down multiple times together trying to figure out how we can fix this situation. So it wasn't like we just went ahead and did it. We had many meetings with the city about it. And this was the solution that between Ernie, ISD, and Eversource that everybody came up with. I'm not an expert on electrical transformers, but I took advice from all the experts. and it was an expensive change. So it wasn't what we wanted.

Thank you. Zach Zaremba.

Yeah, I'm gonna vote to approve this tonight. I understand what's Brian saying about that we can only enforce zoning decisions and try to maintain the same standard that we do for others. We have in the past and we are able to now look into this a little bit more deeply and see reasons why this project fits the criteria for the hardship variance. And when I looked through planning's memo about how it was going to affect people and affect the public good, I didn't really buy it. It barely encroaches into the sidewalk. It doesn't really affect the pedestrians walking through there, which is not a busy area as it is. I don't want to set a precedent that developers can continue to put transformers in the front of buildings. But in this instance, if they were not able to get the easement, they were not able to work with the utility company to have it underground or in the back. And they're not able to share the other transformer in the back. While also providing a brand new building that provides additional housing and also green housing that outweighs I think the detriment of the zoning boards. need to enforce when the Irish we do have the ability to. grant a hardship variance and have a better net benefit, I think, to the city so. Thank you. That's my piece.

All right. Thanks.

Madam chair, I'm sorry to interrupt, but it may be helpful for the board to understand.

I.

I don't believe I mentioned this earlier, I may have, but this building has 2.4 affordable units. And I believe those residents are waiting to move in. The other residents, there is a temporary CFO because there are other residents scheduled to move in. uh and inspectional services afforded the cevo the temporary cevo so that those residents would not be displaced so this is a situation where you know people are waiting to move in and people could be displaced and completely agree with the board we don't there shouldn't be precedent Every case is a case-by-case basis. Unfortunately, this is not necessarily, it's a similar but not so similar to the previous case I brought before the board back in August, based on what the gentleman who previously worked for Eversource had talked about with the sharing of power with butter, but they don't want to share and I don't want to beat that dead horse. The developer had to do everything feasible to have this project move along. It is providing housing stock, which we constantly talk about the housing crisis. This developer is trying to provide that housing as well as, like I said, 2.4 units are designated affordable units. what is um thank you mr guerrero what a question are these condos or apartments they are apartments madam chairwoman and what is 2.4 equal out to so yeah it's i don't have my calculator it's 20 of the 12 units so two units are designated affordable and then the housing division calculates what the point for fractional share should be so the developer pays money to the city of summer. Okay, thank you. And please, math is not necessarily my strong suit. I cannot figure out their whizzes with that, but they provide the developer, you know, what that is. And you cannot get a certificate of occupancy until you pay those monies. And I do think the developer has paid those and that's why they were granted a temporary certificate of occupancy pending this hearing.

You know, some of these cases that come up to us, the hardship variances, we can tell right off that it was somebody that doesn't usually develop or do things like this or they dealt with somebody or a bunch of rookies and they didn't know what they were playing with. And, you know, They come up and they've done with the hardship variance. It's supposed to come at the very beginning. We changed our powers to be, changed some of the rules and regulations a while ago because people were complaining about money. They're saying, gee whiz, we went through this whole process and now we find out we have a hardship variance. So we flipped it around and we get the hardship variance is usually in the front after they hit the planning board to get going, they'll turn it over to us. you know it's unfortunate when you're dealing with i'm tired of hearing the covet story but i know it's a fact of life and it's tough when you deal with the public utilities because they're they're the boss i mean there's no way we can get around them even putting a cable in your house they want to stick it out front you know and it covers you know it doesn't look nice you know we don't like the aesthetics of it so i understand um our question is to gee whiz what the heck you know, we've got to stick by the rules a little bit too. We always can't be worried about the applicant's pocketbook. But I like the explanation that Mr. Sesso gave us and that he put the numbers out there. It cost us this, we had to do this, we had to do this with this. And that explains the story a little bit of a past case we had in hopefully at this stage of the game we don't have any more coming right up to us hardship variances because of eversource i hope that's the case right now i mean you uh miss vigorito you said you don't have any others coming up but we have other oh there could be there's many other attorneys you know i i don't want to deal with them as far as you know pipelines yeah and we don't like saying no you know so that's what i've always said before so uh Does anybody else have any other questions to put forth? I mean, we straightened out the easement story and there wasn't enough power. I thought at first that they just wouldn't give the easement and we couldn't get in there to have access to the transformer. But now you're saying that there wasn't enough power to share. It wouldn't be enough down on the long run.

I have a question, Sue. Yes, please, Ann. When the applicant talked about having worked through this with ISD, you know, Mr. Anton Vika, is it procedural that we are the last to know? Or you should have, you know, redrawn the drawings and come to us saying, here's a proposed fix. Sarah Silver, That we have to you know, take a bite out of the corner of the building. Sarah Silver, Is it. Sarah Silver, Maybe the staff question, I mean, why are we hearing about this so late, it still takes time to rebuild it.

This is Steve Carey through the chair. I can't speak to meetings with ISD because I wasn't in them. But sure, that absolutely should be the order of events. As soon as it is known that what you're proposing is not zoning compliant, it should file an application for arch of variance and come before the board before you go and build something that's zoning non-compliant. And again, I can't speak to their conversation with ISD or what ISD advised them to do, but that's absolutely the order that things should go in.

Yeah, red flag should come up right away. Thank you, Ann. Cece, you have any comments tonight?

I, um, My thinking is similar to Zach's, where I think there is an issue of hardship here. particularly as the underground vault was not able to be sourced in a timely manner. You know, this has been going on for a while and it seems like every avenue to correct the, to have a better outcome was pursued. And unfortunately here we are faced with a situation that's really unpleasant for everyone. But I would,

personally support the hardship variance okay thank you madam chair this is uh this is brian again we're going to need some language for criterion one um and uh if you're gonna have it on the record it needs to be stated on the record what the criteria how the criteria is being met because as far as i can tell from the zoning ordinance and the statute something that has to do with a problem with a public utility company does not meet criterion one so Right like to hear what the what the what the language is for meeting criterion one.

All right, and also tonight, I just like to mention that. Where's my papers here. There was some points still outstanding.

Steve Monowitz, Madam chair, this is Steve I can speak to that. Steve Monowitz, it's, of course, at the board's discretion, if you'd like to take a vote tonight um there is a issue separate from the application presently before you with regards to an encroachment on the left side of the building. Steve Monowitz, That I know the applicant has been in touch with ISD about out the applicant wants to take time just to explain what that is um. it's in the process of being resolved uh it seems like they have arrived at the solution um but on the possibility that that also requires some degree of relief um it'd be our recommendation to hold your vote on this application um until we're sure that you know another another application doesn't need to be included and just to wait until the um the resolution is reached for that issue, the encroachment issue. And again, if the applicant wants to speak to that, that'd be great.

Okay.

Sure. I'd be happy to, Madam Chairman. So the Apparently, on the left side of the building, when we did the final as built, we're 2 inches over onto the neighbor's property line. So we either have to remove the siding. On the left side and shave it down 2 inches, which we can do. It's going to cost about 25,000 dollars, or I'm asking Claire, who's the owner of the building next to us. If if we can do an agreement where. she'll just let it go so we have a meeting coming up beginning of next week but it has nothing to do with the transformer so either way we're either going to rip off the siding redo it or we're going to get an agreement with the neighbor on the left side of the building so i'd like to ask staff steve does the neighbor have the right to approve that and then it wouldn't come out under our purview for approval i can't really speak to the specifics of that i do know that if

If there was an encroachment, I believe ISD is thinking if there was an encroachment that wasn't able to be resolved by, you know, shaving down cladding on the side of the building, then that would be subject to some sort of some sort of relief. Again, I can't speak to the specific situation, but I do know that, again, if there was an approach that wasn't able to be resolved and needed to be resolved through relief, then it would be back before you. So again, I can't speak to the certainty at this point that that is going to be resolved. So that's the only reason that our recommendation would be a continuance until that's resolved. But if you as the board are confident in the applicant's explanation, then that's at your discretion.

Okay. Madam Chair, this is Kit. We have a member of the audience with their hand raised now.

Oh, okay. I was just going to ask about that. Thank you. Good evening. Steve, could you pull up the timer by any chance?

Yes, I can do that. Thank you. And then I'll unmute Daniel and he'll be given two minutes to speak.

Good evening. Daniel?

Hi, can you hear me?

Yes, we can. Would you state for the record your name and address, please?

Yes, I'm Daniel Dingen with 882 Broadway on the other side of 872. And I was just curious to hear that there is a encroachment over the property line. That's a similar issue that we've had on our property. We saw, I guess, a difference of opinion between our zoning measurement and the zoning for 872. And I was curious to see if that Um, Elon said that it was with someone named Claire. So I wasn't sure if that was a separate concern or the same concern. And I was also, I was also concerned, um, about how those might be getting addressed. If that would be, it sounded like that might be a factor in, in this concern, uh, or in this issue versus not being a matter in this issue.

So you're Daniel and you live at 882 Broadway?

Yes.

And that is next door to 872. Are you in a residence home or is it the corner where all the commercial property is?

Residential.

So it's to the right of this looking at it?

Yes.

Oh, okay. All right. Good. And you're having an issue with with 872 on your side as well?

Yes. We've had issues for many years that we've spoken with ISD about. Yes.

And what is the name of the building that's a historic building? next there. It used to be a big party function.

Yeah, Cabot Farms was my grandparents' catering company.

Oh, all right. Good. Okay. I know of that. Okay. Beautiful. So you're saying on your side, you have an issue as well. It's gone on for years or just since this all started.

Yes, it has.

Let me see. Can I see what we're looking at? Anybody have a picture I can see? Karen Hollweg, On the screen.

Karen Hollweg, bring it back up yeah.

Karen Hollweg, i'm looking at I have my plans and i'm looking at before and after. Karen Hollweg, And I see. Karen Hollweg, This way. It is, yeah.

Do you want me to just bring up an aerial image for reference about where we're talking?

Anything that we can see so the rest of the board can see what he's talking about.

Property to the left.

Can I make a comment, Madam Chair?

In one minute, please. All right, so I see the corner there and there's the easement to the left going back to where the transformer is. I see the construction's going on and I see this big empty space attached to a cab of homes. Mr. Daniel, what's that big open empty space?

Yes, a few years ago, maybe 15 now, we were asked to take down, that used to come all the way to the street. We were asked to take that down. We've been looking for a commercial resident, but we haven't. We haven't found one. But part of the issue that we've had with 872 is they dug out that driveway where my car is parked, the blue car, to make space to pour their foundations without permission. A little over a year, they were using that space and doing a lot of damage to it, unfortunately, while doing construction. I called the police. I called ISD multiple times. and only when they finished construction adjacent to our property did they vacate our property. I didn't want to bring it up pertaining to the transformer, but when a board member mentioned issues with neighbors, I thought that it would be appropriate for me to contribute.

Tell me something, looking at this picture. Did you ever contact Mr. Sassoon?

Yes, yes.

Okay, so he knows who you are.

He's thrilled to hear from me.

Pardon me?

Nothing, I'm sure he's excited to see my name.

Okay, now where that car is and that driveway is there, that you're saying is your property and that's your driveway as it exists?

It looks like it might still be Brett KenCairn, paved in this picture, but that that can't I think it's just I think it's just an unclear picture, yes, that that is, that is my driveway as it exists.

Janet Callahan- So well. Janet Callahan- What space do they have from that side of the building to your driveway.

The foundation of the port is a couple inches over our property line as well. The zero lot line, there's a discrepancy on where that should be.

Well, I think you better get together with Mr. Sassoon. I'm shocked. I've known him to be developing now a while in the city, and I've never heard of something like this before about his behavior. When was the last time you spoke with him? or did you contact him legally?

It was a few years ago. It was a few years ago when this happened. In the end, we haven't pursued legal action because our legal team isn't confident in... Because we're not on your property.

Okay. All right. Well, thank you. We are on the neighbor on the left's property by two inches. We are not on Daniel's property. And if we were, I would say we were, and I would fix the situation, but we are not. And we have a long history between me, him and his father. And I don't know if you want to hear those stories, but yeah.

No, but I'd ask you to address it and talk to him about it as soon as possible. So next time we meet, it may be something that comes up again. You never know. And I would hope we have a legitimate, honest answer.

But we had our lawyers, Madam Chairman, and his lawyers go through it, showing that we are not on his property at all. And then two years ago, they said, okay, no, we're not doing anything. And I haven't heard from him in two years. And he comes to this meeting and brings it up.

Okay. All right. Thank you. um i'll ask that this be conducted separate from the board this is not something the board has to be all right so um if there's nobody else with their hands up on the public portion i will close the kit to double check that and so we will close that now at 7 0 6 p.m this is kit i do not see anyone else with their hand raised Okay, you take care of that, please. Closing that off. Now, as far as the board goes, Mr. Carey's saying, do we want to continue this whole thing? Do you guys think you need some more time?

What do you feel the applicant- Madam Chair, if I may, Anne Brockleman has her hand up.

Oh, I'm sorry, Ann. Go ahead, please.

In the staff memo, there's also the matter of the the balconies in a public way, as opposed to the neighbor. I understand the neighbor, you could be settled between neighbors, but what is, and it says not remediable through the ZBA. So what is the remedy for this or who's looking at the overhanging balconies?

I can speak to that. I believe it's a an awning license from the City Council that would be required for a balcony that's coming into the public way. There's a couple. There's a few different things that where I mean, as you see, the obviously what was built deviates from what the planning board approved. So they do need to go back to the planning board regardless to basically for what's called a plan revision and a major amendment to a um site plan approval um in order to get approval for those changes so um and uh like i said it's a license from the city council required for balconies that overhang the public way um the first bullet in that uh is is the encroachment that i was that i was referring to um and that i really should that i think i i um in the memo I think it's miswritten and that first bullet actually is something that can be remediable through the ZBA. It's just not remediable through the present application before you. They would need to come back for a separate application for that relief if they were to seek relief for that encroachment. The first bullet. The first bullet.

Right. The second is the public way. And are you saying that awning and balcony is the same thing by definition? Because you're Dina Israel- awning is just you know, a canopy whereas balcony is something that you're it's program space and you are occupying over a public way so is that technically the same or to be determined or you're using the terms loosely Steve.

Steve DeRoy- I. Steve DeRoy- interchangeable. Steve DeRoy- I would say i'm using the terms interchangeably that was from a comment that I had made, I believe they're approved through the same through the same avenue through the same permit.

But you're not confirming that the definition of auditing and balcony are the same. That's correct, because I would the remedy would be go to Juliet balcony or move the balcony back. So, but that's that's not for today. Okay.

And you're saying as well, the encroachment is not for today either.

Joseph Baeta, Supt of Schools & Correct if the encouragement was something that ultimately does require relief to resolve that would have to be they'd have to come back and essentially. Joseph Baeta, Supt of Schools & add that to the relief they're seeking.

JoAnne Hanrahan, And what about this. JoAnne Hanrahan, Well, right now, if you're saying a portion of the second or third stories left appear to be encroaching. JoAnne Hanrahan, Well, are they are aren't they and if they are, what can they do. before really having to tear down the shingles and put something else up? Apply for a hardship variance?

I'd let the applicant speak to that. If they're able to remove cladding to bring that entirely onto their property and ISD is able to confirm that, then they wouldn't need any relief. If it turns out that they're not able to reach that resolution, then the route of relief would be needed.

So Madam Chairman, in speaking with Kevin Klein, the new head of ISD, we didn't speak about relief because that wasn't one of the options. The options were we remove the cladding, shave it back two inches, which we'll do, or I get the lady next door to sell us two inches of her property.

Okay. All right.

So we're speaking to her and meeting her again next week. And I think, I think she's going to do it. If not, we'll tear it apart and redo it.

Alrighty. And what's Steve, what's the story with the basement?

The basement is configured differently than was on the floor plans that were approved by the planning board. So that again would be subject to plan a revision with the planning board.

Okay. All right. JoAnne Hanrahan, That okay so. JoAnne Hanrahan, Okay. JoAnne Hanrahan, So where do we go from here tonight. JoAnne Hanrahan, History Steve Steve, what are you advising us to do, then tonight.

Our recommendation, again, it is at the board's discretion, would be to continue this. The date can be a date of the applicant's choosing or the board's choosing of when we think that encroachment issue will be uh fully resolved um and then once that result that once that is resolved and we're certain that no other relief besides the transformers is required um then the board takes that vote so i don't know if that means uh the next meeting on the on the 15th or if that means a november meeting okay and um if not if the board i always say the pleasure of the board they want to vote on this tonight they may do so

that is correct okay so um have you folks had time your questions been answered if you want to go forward tonight or would you like to wait just another couple of weeks and come back and um revisit you had any final questions and then vote that night madam chair yes ian i know

Two board members have expressed that they're ready to vote, but I will say that I'm not. There's such a long history going to 2022 of unfortunate, unforeseen conditions, things that could be controlled, things that couldn't, perhaps non-accurate construction. I don't feel like now we have to rush, I'd rather get all the other ducks in a row first, as you suggested. And I'd like to hear from planning or department or planning board on this issue of if there are future transformers going on in the public way know have they have they thought about that in terms of zoning and how it's impacting the urban and pedestrian experience on the sidewalk um i know this is it for one developer but i'd like to see a more holistic um opinion or a look at it Steve, has this been discussed at all internally with your director? Sure. Is every building going to have a bite in the corner, right? That's like the shape of the future, all of our buildings on the street?

Sure. I mean, I guess I'll just say to start that these are conversations that are happening at a higher level than Kit and myself as case planners. That being said, we all recognize that we have goals as a city for decarbonization, for electrifying buildings, and more and more transformers are just going to continue to be a fact of life if we want to achieve that decarbonization. So I don't think it's out of the question that we may be rethinking our zoning ordinance in terms of how we regulate transformers and perhaps saying a blanket prohibition on mechanical equipment in the frontage area is just too stringent of a standard. So it's possible that we rethink that. It's possible we've talked about potentially coming up with some design standards for transformers so that if we know that they have to be in the front, if there's a way they can be better integrated in facade so you don't have this like you know chunk out of the side of a building to put this in um and of course i think you know conversations definitely need to be had between think eversource and i think people higher than myself at the city um just in terms of um you know whatever sources you know, standards are for for citing and their their communication about that citing and what flexibility there is. So we definitely understand this is a much larger issue than that, that should not be continued to be solved on like a case by case basis. So I hope hope that's a satisfying answer. But that's, that's the one I have for now.

My one thought is for me too, when we do these votes, I've had the pleasure of serving on the board for a while now, and I've always felt that, especially, I don't want to say this to insult the current case, but when we have smaller little projects and back porches and front porches and windows and doors and the family all comes up they used to come up to city hall and stop the whole family you know i'd say to them because they'd be getting all nerved up and everything and say wait a minute we're not here to say no we're here to say yes we want families to have places to live and enjoy living here we want businesses to open and prosper and benefit And we all talk about money, money, money. If we have all kinds of people living here and all kinds of businesses flourishing here, that's all money for the city too in the form of taxes and what have you. So here's my question. If this is done, there are people living in this building, if we go forward and deny it, then what happens? you know, the cause and effect. I mean, we can ideally say, well, that's not our concern. We're here to enforce the ordinances. But, you know, there's the yin and the yang. We've got to pay attention to the other side of the coin. And like Anne's saying, you know, she doesn't want to rush to judgment. She wants a little more time to think about it. And two of our members have voiced their opinion that they would approve this. So that's my thing. Then I turn around and say, what happens if we take a vote and we don't get the four votes they need tonight to go forward with this? Then what do you do? What do you do with the property? What do you do with all the expenditures? And what do you do with the families that are in these places, in this building? So it'd be the pleasure of the board. If Anne Sands should like to wait, I'm willing to wait. uh Ian Fullerton or Brian were you ready to vote tonight or would you want to wait till the 15th I want to mention though that um one of our board members will not be here October 15th so that brings us down to uh I'll show you know the five I won't be in on the 15th unfortunately that, yeah, I wasn't gonna say who it was, but I know Zach put in his dibs a long time ago. And so yes, Steve has his hand up, Steve Carey.

It may, through the chair to the applicant, if you guys have a timeline for when you expect this encroachment issue to be resolved, I think that might be helpful for the board's thinking.

So the ISD said, Kevin Klein said, we have six months to resolve it. So we're working within that time period. I need to negotiate with the neighbor. Again, if she says no, we're just going to rip apart the siding. We're not coming back to the board. We're just going to fix it ourselves. We're not coming back to the board.

All right. Thank you.

Thank you.

So what? Yes, Brian. Acting Chair.

If we're going to have a vote tonight, we need your decision about who is the, whether we need a, we don't need an additional vote, right? The alternates don't need to vote tonight.

One, two, three. for no we have four regular members for the vote but um

So because we haven't filled the position, we still need an alternate vote. Right.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. So the two alternates.

So you'll need to apprise us on who you want to vote, number one. But number two, we still haven't answered the question of what are our findings on the criteria. And that leads me to lean toward Member Brockleman's position, which is we probably need a little bit more time to sort this out.

Okay. And, yeah, I said one member is going to be out. Oh, no, but the second member is going to be here. That's okay. All right. Well, is it the pleasure of the board we continue this until the 15th?

I just have a question, what is going to change between now and the 15th.

I think people's understanding and dissect understanding of what's been going on. They should we should all be well versed enough right now by now, but I think after see hearing the professional come forward in Mr says soon being here and the architect being here and the Attorney I think we've had other. JoAnne Hanrahan, New information to digest if that's the case, I don't know I can't speak for the other Members in full attend you have a comment for zach or for the board.

Anne Fulton, that's actually for Mr so soon, and Mr sema i'm wondering what what your game plan would be if we were to deny. Your hardship variance, I'm sorry.

Miss. Miss bullet and this is attorney bigger read or perhaps I should answer it from the legal standpoint. You know, because Mr would probably look to me as to. What he would have to do if it was denied. He has a temporary certificate of occupancy, so inspectional services could then revoke it, and the tenants of the building, including the affordable units, would have to move out regardless of the visa.

Ms. Figueredo, not to interrupt you, but I understand that. I think my question is, what is the solution?

I don't know. And I'm not being fresh. I don't know if there is a solution because of the transformer issue. It would, I don't think it's feasible to move it.

So, it is, it's very expensive as Mr. and Mr. would, I'm sure confirm. But my, my question is, because I'm trying to figure out if you guys have developed a plan B.

And it sounds like at least from your point of view, Mr. Vigorito, there is no plan B. I mean, the plan B would be to, you know, they would have to because if the certificate of occupancy was revoked, you know, first off, you would have to ask the residents to leave because they would if they couldn't have electricity. Yes, then that would have to be what happens. But. You know, and I don't want to speak of Mr. Sassoon's finances. I'm sure I know he has mortgages and I don't know what those are, but, you know, he may not be able to afford to do that. You know, you always talk about the plan B among the team with the hopes that you never have to go there, but that would be the plan B. Karen Hollweg, You know, it may be an unforeseeable though the building may say vacant, because I don't know the cost would be exorbitant to move that transformer so. Karen Hollweg, You know, you know, perhaps. Karen Hollweg, i'm sorry I think Madam chair wants question but.

Karen Hollweg, I have a question I thought we're at the with the final end with the transform aware, it is, I thought there was no other option. Karen Hollweg, Back. They can't piggyback off the neighbors. They can't put one beside it because they don't have the easement and the space to get a 10-foot. They need that 10-foot clearance. There's no in the ground. And there's the only, the top, the up, the tower, the transformer that's there now. I didn't know we had another option.

Well, Madam Chair, any other option is going to be much more expensive, but like having to put it back in the ground. So in what, three years from now, two years from now? not necessarily it's dependent on equipment right right so you know what do we do have a abandoned building like i'm living at the end of my street that something's in land court that's been years now it's an eyesore and detrimental to the neighborhood but i don't think we can assume that it would sit as an abandoned property just as we couldn't assume that um that it would have taken three years to actually get the in the ground transformer. It's an unknown quantity. So my question was, do they have a plan B? The answer I got was no.

I mean, just to, and I don't want to belabor this, the plan B would be catastrophic. And once again, I don't speak to a developer's finances, but the first order of business would be, you know, the CFO would most likely be revoked. I don't know how quickly. And then you have to empty the building. And at that point, you know, it could be an abandoned building. The ownership could go bankrupt or they would have to maybe sell it. These are all other options that the developer would have to look at. It would not be that it's not a quick fix to move a transformer. That's something that would take quite a bit of time and yes, quite a bit of money.

We talk about it like it's nothing. know we've done 86 buildings in the city of somerville in the last 13 years love the city and do the best work that we possibly can and so you know this is we were asked to move it once we spent 100 grand moving it and and they didn't have the equipment and and this is what the solution was for eversource this is what they approved so you know Eversource told us what to do. ISD was involved. Everybody knew what was happening. Everybody signed off on it. this is what we did we didn't just arbitrarily unilaterally do something ourselves and we didn't want to do it it was a fortune and that's a gorgeous building phil designed a beautiful building last thing i wanted to do is take out the window and put a big steel box in front of the building but we did the best we could we wrapped it now wrapping wasn't good enough we screened it we're doing the best we can to make it look beautiful and have a gorgeous building across from tufts university that people love and it is a great building people are moved in they love the building it's got a gorgeous roof deck you know there's been challenges along the way but as there is with anything in life so this is what this is what we got

excuse me so then my question to the zoning or to the planning team is what is what is the point of this hearing other than to rubber stamp approved it's a fair question and it's the process we have um and i think that it's through a process like this that we can determine whether there is you know is is another solution to this um and it doesn't doesn't sound like there is but um i i guess i i would like to know isd's history of commentary on this project so that's the one piece of history i feel like is missing for me personally but also to the planning team it makes no sense to me that that we're receiving reports saying deny as as a strategy i mean we understand that it doesn't conform with zoning but if there is not a choice understood um i mean i'd be happy to have isd um a member a representative isd come to a come to a future meeting

Yes, Brian.

I'd like to change my position on what we should do. At this point, let's get some language for Criterion 1. Criterion 2 and 3 are already well spelled out in the staff memo and from comments from the applicant. Let's get some language that we can agree on for Criterion 1 and let's have a vote tonight. and let's send this sorry case on back to the planning board to resolve whatever issues it has so you're willing to you want to vote tonight that's what i would prefer yes i'm sure it would help the applicant as well and there i i agree i don't see any reason to continue holding this case and brockleman do you mind that's fine i would like to ask one

last rhetorical question because obviously we're here is why are we just seeing this now when the architect is drawing okay you have to take a bite out of the building when was that why are we seeing this now it's so late years um if i go through the timeline just for my edification Right when you knew you had to change the building isn't that when you. approach planning staff or cba staff is that in 2022 or 2023. Building current for the project was issued. In at what point are you should you have come to us just humor me. Looking at this timeline.

So we didn't actually know until, um, was it six or eight months ago, Phil, and we just got the CEO, you know, four weeks ago and everybody moved in. So we, we didn't actually know we had the vault in the ground, the beautiful window, the building finished, everything's happy and everyone's excited. And then they tell us we have to take it out that you're not going to get a transformer.

underground so so the minute you knew that the transformer was going to go from above underground to above ground that is a zone in violation that's when you start the file right away right was that only six months ago it wasn't too long ago first thing we wanted to do is oh why don't we try to get an easement from the neighbor and put a transformer in the back next to the other one and she wouldn't give us one

Dave Kuntz, If we can use the same driveway because I didn't want it in the front either I don't want these in the front. Dave Kuntz, But that didn't work so. But how many times in the 12, 13 years that I've been building in Somerville have I ever come for a variance? Last 379 Somerville Ave a month ago and this one, never in 13 years have I ever come for variances. So I don't really know the rules and regulations. I do now very well, but I didn't really know the rules and regulations of the variance. So yeah, that might have been our fault. But and nobody told us of all the meetings we had with ISD. Nobody said, apply for your variants. Now. Nobody said no one told me that. So we, you know, it was after the fact when we got the CEO, you got to go back and get the variants. I was like, Oh, okay. We got to do that. Okay, it wasn't. It wasn't out front.

all right so um we're all going to vote on this tonight cece is going to vote brian your acting clerk we're going to help brian right now write this up so when he makes the motion uh he's 100 confident in what he's saying and doing and uh how are we gonna do this um brian do you have something do you have anything created there in front of you at all Does anybody have any comments?

The best we can do is to say that it has to do with the shape of the lot which made alternative decisions for the location of the transformer require negotiations with abutters that were unsuccessful. And because of imperatives from the utility company with respect to the availability of equipment, the applicant was forced to locate it in violation of the placement of a zoning ordinance provision regarding mechanical equipment.

Ann, how does that sound with you guys, Zach, Cecilia? What do you think?

I appreciate member Cook's effort to put together language.

I agree.

Me too. Yeah. I'm usually very happy with what he says, but I just want to throw it out there for you guys. If you have something you want to interject to add to it. Everybody's happy. What about Steph? Kit and Steve, did you hear what he said? Is it okay? Yes. This kit. Yeah. All right. Good. All right.

So just for the record, we can affirm that it would require a financial hardship on the applicant if relief was not provided.

Right. And now we come to number two. Right. Okay. Good. All right. Everybody ready? Cece, you're voting. Zach, Ian, Ann, and Susan. Brian, you're under the gun right now. You're the clerk. Do your thing.

Okay. Remember, we have two separate votes we have to take.

Right.

Yep. So in the matter of 872 Broadway ZP25-000064, I am moved to approve the hardship variance for relief. Dave Kuntz, From Somerville zoning ordinance section 2.4.3 point D point five to allow mechanical equipment in the frontage area of a lot incorporating the findings on the required criteria as discussed and the conditions as enumerated in in the ppc staff memo dated August 15 2025. Karen Hollweg, Good.

Karen Hollweg, I have a second on the motion.

Seconded.

Seconded by Zach Zaremba. All in favor, as we go around, please say aye. Sisia Daglian. Aye. Zach Zaremba.

Aye.

Anne Brockleman. Aye. Ann Fullerton. Aye. And Susan Fontano, aye. Let the record show, all voting members voted in the affirmative. Next, please, Mr. Clerk.

in the matter of 872 broadway zp25-000065 i move to approve the hardship variance for relief from the ground story primary facade fenestration requirement somerville zoning ordinance section 4.1.8.d for a general building in the mid-rise 3 mr3 zoning district incorporating the findings on the required criteria as discussed and the conditions as enumerated in the PPZ staff memo dated August 15th, 2025.

May I have a second? Second. Seconded. Seconded by Sisia Daglian. All in favor, please say aye. Anne Brockleman? Aye. Ann Fullerton? Aye. Zach Zaremba?

Aye.

Sisia Daglian aye and susan fontano aye let the record show that all voting members voted the affirmative the motion carries thank you well thank you very everyone this was a tough one and uh we all grovel and with our conscience of what we understand and what we know and do so hopefully uh go forward now and get this thing going and we'll see what happens with any of the others that might come down the pike thank you for your patience and your questions and i i thank the applicant and his team for being congenial with us as well thank you for your kindness and your help all right good luck you guys

Thank you.

That's right. Go Sox. I got to see what the score is. Thank you, Phillip. Thank you.

Thank you.

Bye. Bye-bye. To the board, you guys were brilliant tonight. Thank you so much. Ian? JoAnne Hanrahan, Bulletin in in brockleman it's i'm really serious good questions to ask Thank you Brian good job as always keeping us on track here good job and brockleman just for the records going to be acting clerk next meeting and zach will be out, but I think everybody else is going to be here right. JoAnne Hanrahan, Unless anything happens. JoAnne Hanrahan, You get your jacket on over there like kid you look like you're taking off are ready to go home and do something. JoAnne Hanrahan, We switcher. JoAnne Hanrahan, Steve thanks for joining us tonight and helping. JoAnne Hanrahan, Let us know about this other stuff the fancy comes down. JoAnne Hanrahan, Anybody have any comments.

JoAnne Hanrahan, No, no adjourn.

JoAnne Hanrahan, Okay who's going to second that again. JoAnne Hanrahan, Seconded by am brockelman all in favor please say aye. Ann Fullerton?

Aye. The score's three to two, Yankees.

Blue. Sisia Daglian? Aye. Brian Cook?

Aye.

Max Zaremba?

Aye.

And I think I asked Ann. Ann, do it again, because I don't want to close the meeting if you're not ready. Aye. Ann Souza-Fontana, aye. Thank you, guys. Good night.

Good night.