A tree grows in city, condos might not

Dr. Mohamed Butt is fighting a condo project next to his office. (George Rizer/Globe Staff)

They lost in court, but they might win on the street. Five years after Somerville's Zoning Board of Appeals approved a condominium development at 343-349 Summer St., neighborhood support for a tree could still scuttle the project.

The project would put 14 units of housing, plus underground parking, on the site of an MBTA subway ventilation and emergency escape shaft. Several neighbors say that at 4 1/2 stories, the building would be too big for the area.

In order to obtain a building permit, the board required developer Dakota Partners (formerly Emerald Development Group) to meet several conditions. One is creating a fire lane. But the tree in question stands in the way on the sidewalk.

About 25 people attended a Nov. 15 hearing, said Ward 6 Alderwoman Rebekah Gewirtz, to oppose removing the tree.

From there, it could be one thing after another. Dakota has applied for a minor-revision permit to move the fire lane, in case the tree stays. If the zoning board determines the revision is not minor, it will require a public hearing with a two-week notice period, and all abutters must be informed of the request. Residents could offer comments at the hearing.

"It's never been desired," said Nancy Iappini, whose house at 36 Hawthorne St. is directly behind the Summer Street site. "The building is too big and there's a ton of safety problems."

Gewirtz also opposes the plan. "I believe it's a failure of government that allowed this project to go forward," she said. "I don't think the project should have been permitted in its current form."

Dakota lawyer Richard DiGirolamo said the company has acted responsibly. "We've done a tremendous amount of mediation. We tried to address every issue that's been raised," he said, noting that the Supreme Judicial Court decided a lawsuit in favor of the developers in January.

The neighbor who filed the lawsuit, orthodontist Mohamed Butt, is still furious. The entire wall of his rear warehouse could fall when builders dig under it, he said. He also complained that Dakota fenced off an easement he has on the MBTA tract.

Butt, who says he has spent $100,000 on legal bills in the case, plans to take Dakota to Land Court over the easement.

Butt and Iappini said Alderman at Large John M. Connolly pushed the project through despite community opposition in 2002, when he was the Ward 6 alderman. Iappini thinks the development was the main reason Connolly lost the ward seat.

Connolly said this project was the best alternative for the property, which was rezoned as residential in 2005. "It was zoned commercial business at the time. They could've put a small strip mall there," he said. "If nothing happens there, the city loses an opportunity" for tax revenue. He recalls roughly seven of 10 neighbors as supporting the project at the time.

Butt and Iappini have additional safety concerns, citing the structure's proximity to the MBTA shaft and maintenance problems in other Dakota buildings.

Iappini also said her basement already floods, and with so much dirt removed from the MBTA site, "it's going to turn my property into a bog." Gewirtz said Dakota had not yet met the conditions for drainage and construction management plans.

DiGirolamo disagreed and added that the developer has "provided an extreme amount of scientific evidence saying nothing about this project is unsafe."

Gewirtz said she's not against developing the parcel. "If the developer comes back with a proposal that's smaller, that's more fitted to the neighborhood, I would be very interested in seeing that."

Butt agreed.

Even with fewer units, he said, "they'll make their money easily. It seems like we speak, but nobody listens to us. It's frustrating."