Applicant seeks variances to expand detached garage at 71 North Dowy Avenue; neighbors raise sunlight and encroachment concerns

The Somerville Board of Adjustment on April 1, 2026 heard an application from property owner Mark Sadrack seeking multiple variances to replace and expand a detached garage at 71 North Dowy Avenue. Sadrack told the board the project is intended to meet the needs of a growing family.

Architect Joseph Periano presented the proposal and said the existing detached garage (about 437 square feet) would be expanded so the overall accessory structure would contain roughly 525 square feet of garage space and about 690 square feet of storage and finished space, for a combined total near 1,218 square feet. Periano told the board the project adds approximately 693 square feet of finished space and that sloped attic areas under seven feet would not be counted in the floor-area calculation.

Periano said several variances are required: the improvement coverage currently shown at about 57.39% is expected to be reduced to about 54.89% after converting a gravel area back to grass, but the proposed F.A.R. would rise to about 32.57% (above a 30% maximum), creating the need for a D4 variance. He also said the accessory building footprint would exceed the 600-square-foot accessory limit (the rebuilt structure is described as approximately 864 square feet by footprint calculation). The architect described the requested C variances as flexible C relief (benefits outweigh detriments) and noted the site offers ample parking: “the driveway itself could probably hold five cars … and obviously we’re making the garage larger. So you’re going to have two spaces in the garage. So there’s seven available parking spaces on site,” he said.

Neighbors from 64 Mountain Avenue raised objections. Chris Cutler said he was concerned that portions of the new structure would present a 21-foot-high wall near his property and that the height and placement would block sunlight to his garden: “there’ll be a 21 foot high wall on the south side … blocking out the sunlight that goes to our garden,” he said. Neighbor Margaret Phillips asked how the back of the garage would be maintained without entering adjacent property.

Periano responded that the wall height along the gutter would be a typical one-story wall (9–10 feet) and that the 21-foot figure represents the roof peak; he said the design reorients the roof ridge so the peak would be less visible from neighbors, that no windows or skylights are proposed on the neighbor-facing side, and that the current encroaching bumpout on the adjacent property would be removed so the rebuilt structure will sit entirely on the applicant’s lot.

Board members and the architect discussed compromise options including pulling the rebuilt structure several feet off the property line (two to three feet was proposed in the meeting) and modifying roof geometry to reduce shadow impacts. The applicant apologized to neighbors for not initiating earlier outreach and said he is willing to revise plans and work with them.

After discussion the board carried the application to allow revised plans and neighbor review. The applicant agreed to email Borough staff (via Ryan Bakey) to waive the board’s time to act through June 30, 2026 so the board will not face an automatic approval deadline while the parties revise the proposal. The board’s planner will revise his report after resubmission and the board will schedule a resumed hearing once revised plans are filed.

Next steps: the applicant will submit revised drawings addressing roof slope and setback options, circulate those drawings to the neighbors for feedback, and request the board resume the hearing at a later date.