Dear Mayor Curtatone, Alderman Gewirtz, Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals:

We
lend our voices to the unanimous opposition to the proposed Dakota
Partners (formerly Emerald) 14-unit building project at 343-349 Summer
Street. We ask that the Zoning Board of Appeals DENY the request for a
hardship extension of the 2002 special permit for 343-349 Summer Street
(scheduled for discussion at the ZBA meeting on February 4).

We have read the request for a hardship extension of the special permit. The petition is entirely without merit.

The
petition focuses on the issue of relocating of a public shade tree in
the path of one of multiple fire lane access routes proposed over the
past 7 years. The second paragraph states that the ZBA implicitly
acknowledged the necessity to relocate said tree during the 2002 review
for the special permit. One of the ZBA's conditional items on the
original special permit is that the fire lane access issues be resolved
(Condition #7 on SPSR #2002-23).

Dakota Partners followed the
legal process for requesting removal of a public shade tree for the
fire lane proposed across the Dilboy Post property. The neighborhood
opposition to the tree removal and the proposed 14-unit building is
unanimous (see petition filed by Tom Bok of 335 Summer St, which was
signed by over 100 Somerville residents and over 60 neighboring
residents). Dakota Partners received full due process in their request
for removal of the tree and were denied. The denial of the tree
relocation request means that this proposed fire lane access is
impossible. Hence, condition #7 of the special permit is still not met.

Dakota
Partners mentions exploration of an alternate fire lane access through
Dilboy Post and Winter Hill Bank, which was not accepted by Winter Hill
Bank. Dakota Partners has also approached the owner of an adjacent
residential building on Hawthorne Street about an fire lane through his
property.

In 2002, Dakota Partners proposed a 14-unit building
without fire lane access on their own property. Over the past 7 years,
they have explored multiple fire lane options via easements on adjacent
properties without any success. The bottom line is that condition #7
cannot be met with the proposed 14-unit building design and the
existing adjacent properties.

Dakota Partners has had more
than sufficient time to explore and try to resolve fire lane access to
their proposed building. There is no exceptional hardship stated in
their application. The expiration of a special permit is designed
precisely for cases like this one: the original building concept is
flawed and the conditions placed upon it by the ZBA cannot be met.

The
petition also mentions other items that are irrelevant. Dakota Partners
has already received extensions related to the suit filed by Dr. Butt.
Alderman Gewirtz has properly represented the wishes of the residents
in her ward in her opposition to removal of the public shade tree.
Alderman Gewirtz is under no obligation to respond the latest building
plans (with the obstructed fire lane) until condition #7 has been met.

Dakota
Partners has simply proposed a building that does not fit on their
property. The 14-unit building is much larger than the surrounding
residential buildings as recognized by the ZBA in their rezoning of the
lot to Residential A. Dakota Partners has not responded to any of the
many requests by the neighbors to adjust their original design to be a
better fit with the neighborhood. Dakota Partners has a history of
poorly designed and built projects and flagrant non-payment of taxes
and deserves no special consideration by the City of Somerville. This
particular proposal for a 14-unit building has run its due course; it
is time to let the special permit expire and for Dakota Partners to
propose a building that fits on their property.

Sincerely,

Sarah Stewart-Mukhopadhyay, Sujoy Mukhopadhyay