13-story and other alternatives for Copper Mill project

[Christopher Beland]

You can read about the alternative designs and watch the discussion here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Somerville/comments/1qvje8t/13story_and_other_alternatives_for_copper_mill/

And of course feel free to participate! I posted on Reddit as an outreach experiment to hear new voices and maybe spare us some emails. This is not meant to replace DSNC's internal in-person and online discussions, nor direct feedback from you to Copper Mill and the government.

Thanks to the folks who participated in the Elmway discussion that surfaced a strong desire to explore alternative shapes, and to John Bonham-Carter and David Booth and Roger Levy, whose brains have stormed some specific tweaks for us to consider.

-B.

[ebm...@comcast.net]

I applaud the innovative thinking about alternative designs. Thank you for sharing this.  But IMHO we should not be wedded to the developer's goal of 500 units and how best to cram that all into this one space in Davis Sq.   Not taking the developer's stated parameters for the site  would free up even more options for coming up with acceptable design that would "enhance" not "transform" this neighborhood square.

Elizabeth Merrick

---

From: 'Christopher Beland' via Davis Square Neighborhood Council <daviss...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 4, 2026 4:02 AM
To: Davis Square Neighborhood Council <daviss...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [DSNC] 13-story and other alternatives for Copper Mill project

 

--
Davis Square Neighborhood Council · https://DavisSquareNC.org · https://linktr.ee/DavisSquareNC
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Davis Square Neighborhood Council" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to davissquaren...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/65ba4bcb72fefc88774813f357e88ed303d388dd.camel%40alum.mit.edu.

[Jeff Byrnes]

Is there a reason we shouldn’t take advantage of the maximum number of homes, and thus the greatest number of Affordable Homes (aka Inclusionary Zoning homes) possible?

We’re deep in a housing crisis, and desperately in need of both subsidized affordable & market-rate homes, and in this case we’d be getting 25% subsidized affordable instead of the standard 20% requirement.

Projects like these are exceedingly rare, there’s only been two others I know of that went above & beyond for subsidized affordability in the last 9 years (Clarendon Hill and 299 Broadway, both still in-progress).

-- 
Jeff Byrnes
he/him

🌐 somervilleyimby.org

🟦 bsky.app/profile/somervilleyimby.org

📖 facebook.com/SomervilleYIMBY

🐘 better.boston/@SomervilleYIMBY

📷 instagram.com/SomervilleYIMBY

📱 704.516.4628

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/PH0PR17MB4783964193C565775D5B334CFF98A%40PH0PR17MB4783.namprd17.prod.outlook.com.

[Jayne Goethe]

Agreeing with Jeff here!  I think we need to stick to the highest unit count possible, in this case 500 +/-.  I'm excited about the transformation: more businesses, more street life, and more housing!

-Jayne

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/23b478c7-a483-4e8a-ae6d-603fbaae5272%40Spark.

[Carol]

As you all know, I am not in favor of a building that is so out of character for the neighborhood. I consider 26 stories as excessive.

Carol R

Sent from the all new AOL app for iOS

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/CAB%2BRM3%2BSnrb6Gbqi9ycgwc8gwWF1SiRYMwUEwUPhaNts7t8FLA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Janet Wood-Spagnoli]

I am not in favor of a 25 story building. I consider it to be a blight on this very small square. Shorter is better. I would like construction across the square to be considered more holistically to the betterment of housing needs.

Janet 

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 4, 2026, at 14:42, 'Carol' via Davis Square Neighborhood Council <daviss...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

 As you all know, I am not in favor of a building that is so out of character for the neighborhood. I consider 26 stories as excessive.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/545496687.412359.1770234155332%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Ron Newman]

My main concern continues to be the interruption of the Burren’s business, and the potential risk of it not surviving to reopen two or more years later.    I support a scaled-down proposal that would leave the Burren intact, if possible.

[Christopher Beland]

On Wed, 2026-02-04 at 19:42 +0000, Carol wrote:

As you all know, I am not in favor of a building that is so out of character for the neighborhood. I consider 26 stories as excessive.

How do you feel about the proposed alternative of 500 units in 13 stories?

-B.

[Dan Ehrlich.dan]

All hand-waving about mass transit aside, we already have pretty good data about the parking demands of a 500-unit building. Comparable condos selling in the price range we are discussing in the Davis Square region bring a little over one car per unit. This is just the fact. Can we imagine the stress on the square that would be put with 500 additional cars seeking overnight parking?

This is a pretty good deal for the developer if they do not have to pay for the stress that would create. "Transform" seems to me to be the right word here.

Dan

--

Davis Square Neighborhood Council · https://DavisSquareNC.org · https://linktr.ee/DavisSquareNC
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Davis Square Neighborhood Council" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to davissquaren...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/f6b2d6a214f6072cbe28bac4206adadd570305d4.camel%40alum.mit.edu.

[Carol]

Even worse as it only attacks singles or students. 

Sent from the all new AOL app for iOS

[PJ Santos]

A correction, Dan: because this building is near a mass transit stop, residents would not be eligible for street parking passes per Somerville's rules. If residents wanted to being a car, they would have to rent a separate off street parking spot in a garage or a private lot. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/CAA1eyhXCLMsm6%3D3GC-4FCxOAZqzbf07a%2BLNRBBbs7rmDbwA0mg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Colin McMillen]

"My main concern continues to be the interruption of the Burren’s business"

As I understand it, the owner of The Burren is in support of Copper Mill's plan. From a WBUR article [1]:

"In December, Copper Mill submitted an application seeking site approval for a 26-story, 502-unit apartment building in the heart of Davis Square. The application included a letter from Burren owner Tommy McCarthy expressing support for the project."

I trust the current ownership of The Burren to know the details of what's good for their own business. If they support the project, neighborhood members blocking it out of concern for "interrupting" their business is misguided. Honestly, the current uncertainty about the fate of that entire block has had a detrimental effect on many businesses on that block, which is reflected in the number of empty storefronts that have gone unfilled for years. More years of "wait and see" is unsustainable and would probably end up harming, rather than helping, The Burren's long-term financial viability. "Doing nothing" is *also* an interruption to business, just of the more pernicious form in which businesses put off necessary repairs / construction / etc until the place becomes uninhabitable or no longer commercially viable.

[1] https://www.wbur.org/news/2026/01/09/burren-davis-square-high-rise

Colin

On Wed, Feb 4, 2026, at 2:51 PM, 'Ron Newman' via Davis Square Neighborhood Council wrote:

My main concern continues to be the interruption of the Burren’s business, and the potential risk of it not surviving to reopen two or more years later.    I support a scaled-down proposal that would leave the Burren intact, if possible.

--

Davis Square Neighborhood Council · https://DavisSquareNC.org · https://linktr.ee/DavisSquareNC

---

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Davis Square Neighborhood Council" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to davissquaren...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/CAA%3Di0Zjq_Y9ou9OZwRfW1s5-omkytc4j1Bt70MR%2B1OpGR0q%3Ddg%40mail.gmail.com.

[David]

The development includes no parking. Living right next to a heavy rail metro station connected to multiple of the state's largest employment centers and two of its largest universities isn't really hand waving about transit. Davis Square would be among the easiest places in the country to live car free. When we estimate parking requirements of new developments, let's make sure we're comparing apples to apples.

Best

David Tatarakis

On Wed, Feb 4, 2026, 4:06 PM Dan Ehrlich.dan <ehrli...@gmail.com> wrote:

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/CAA1eyhXCLMsm6%3D3GC-4FCxOAZqzbf07a%2BLNRBBbs7rmDbwA0mg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Christopher Beland]

On Wed, 2026-02-04 at 14:24 +0000, Elizabeth Merrick wrote:

I applaud the innovative thinking about alternative designs. Thank you for sharing this.  But IMHO we should not be wedded to the developer's goal of 500 units and how best to cram that all into this one space in Davis Sq.   That would free up even more options for more acceptable design that would "enhance" not "transform" this neighborhood square.

Where do you see the right balance between housing density and height? Six stories of the U-shaped design would give 232 units. Is that enough, or would you prefer closer to 450? Somewhere between 500 and 250 is a donut hole of not-feasible surrounded by a fuzzy layer of low profitability and high financial risk. This is due to the costs of steel construction (6 stories could be mostly wood). We could try to push Copper Mill toward that donut hole, but if people actually prefer 6 stories, it would be easier to just skip right over it.

Factor into that preference that cutting the residential capacity of the core in half means that twice as much land is needed to house the same number of people. Holding constant the amount of housing shortage mitigation, that would mean more displacement of existing buildings, whether along the main commercial streets or inner residential blocks (such as the Jay-Howard-Thorndike-Holland block I live on).

-B.

[Christopher Beland]

On Wed, 2026-02-04 at 21:21 +0000, Carol wrote:

Even worse as it only attacks singles or students.

(I assume that's supposed to be "attracts".)

So the 13-story U-shaped building actually has the same apartment size mix as the 3-story pedestal + 26-story tower design that Copper Mill is proposing. That is (by unit count, not square footage):

• 10% 3BR
• 5% 2BR
• 30% 1BR
• 55% studio

Aggressively forcing 50% of the U-shaped building units to be 2BR or 3BR and converting studios to 1BR where possible would push the building from 13 stories to 20 stories (keeping the same number of units to maintain financial feasibility). Would that 20-story building be preferable to the 13-story one, or would it be better to aim for somewhere in between those heights by having an intermediate % of 2BR and 3BR?

Some relevant stats: Recently constructed buildings of this size in our city have a 3BR ratio of 2%, because 3BRs take up a lot of space and fit better on corners. Smaller buildings have had 12.5% (48 units) or even 100% (3 units). So another way you could choose to make room for families is to attract students and single people into big buildings like Copper Mill's. When some of these people move out of 2BR and 3+BR apartments and get rid of housemates they don't want, they open those apartments in smaller buildings (usually on a residential street with a yard and maybe a driveway) for families with children.

-B.

[Christopher Beland]

On Wed, 2026-02-04 at 14:48 -0500, Janet Wood-Spagnoli wrote:

I am not in favor of a 25 story building. I consider it to be a blight on this very small square. Shorter is better. I would like construction across the square to be considered more holistically to the betterment of housing needs.

Can you quantify that? By "shorter is better", do you mean the 13-story U-shaped building is OK and better than the 3/26-story, or do you also mean 6-story is better than 13 and 1-story is better than 6?

Put another way: After performing the holistic consideration you propose, given the number of stories and number of housing units you want on this site, what is the optimum number of stories you want to see for this building? (I'm happy to estimate the height of more design variations if you need more data to decide.)

-B.

[Mieke Citroen]

So much this. Can we please stop using the Burren as a reason against construction? They have already said that they are perfectly FINE with this arrangement.

Just stop. Please.

--Mieke

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/6d95caa5-1eee-4899-bf6c-3d12c66fafa4%40app.fastmail.com.

[Mieke Citroen]

Here you are just hand waving wrong data. They are not allowed to get a Somerville parking permit. I sincerely doubt that there will be 500 cars looking for a parking space. 

--Mieke

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/CAA1eyhXCLMsm6%3D3GC-4FCxOAZqzbf07a%2BLNRBBbs7rmDbwA0mg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Victoria Antonino]

Hello again,

I believe the Burren is negotiating its own contract with the developer. If not that is an opportunity for the DSNC to assist or put in their own CBA. 

Things that go in a CBA can be

• Specifying the breakdown of unit sizing

• Increasing inclusionary

• Advocating for a future open spaces (or including one on the parcel)  

• Monies for relevant non profits (SCLT, Groundwork Somerville, Somerville Homeless Coalition etc)

• Requiring Union Labor

•Relocation contracts for displaced businesses (what other businesses are in this space besides the Burren)

•Community Space!

•Enhanced streetscapes

•Barring the use of s-gars poison for rat control during and after construction

•Installing raptor habitat 

•Whatever else you can imagine. The worst that a developer can say is no, and then you negotiate  because (again) you hold the cards 

Personally I think green and clean tech commercial use is needed in every square to allow us to do things like build affordable housing, open space and pay for infrastructure and schools, but I digress. 

Heres a link to negotiated  CBAs by the Union Square Neighborhood Council:

https://sites.google.com/view/usnc/cbas?authuser=0

Here’s the one for SOMERNOVA 

https://sites.google.com/view/usnc/somernova-hub

Hope this is helpful. I realize this is a stressful process, but you will figure it out. You’re doing a good job. 

Tori

🦋

Victoria Antonino

Victorious Gardens

to...@victoriousgardens.com

(781) 964-6873

Organic Ecological Landscaping

On Wed, Feb 4, 2026 at 2:52 PM 'Ron Newman' via Davis Square Neighborhood Council <daviss...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

My main concern continues to be the interruption of the Burren’s business, and the potential risk of it not surviving to reopen two or more years later.    I support a scaled-down proposal that would leave the Burren intact, if possible.

--

Davis Square Neighborhood Council · https://DavisSquareNC.org · https://linktr.ee/DavisSquareNC
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Davis Square Neighborhood Council" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to davissquaren...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/CAA%3Di0Zjq_Y9ou9OZwRfW1s5-omkytc4j1Bt70MR%2B1OpGR0q%3Ddg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Victoria Antonino]

Hello all,

Maximizing  the number of unit count does not necessarily translate to addressing the housing crisis (which I would describe more aptly as an affordability crisis). New housing (especially of this size and the opportunity for a CBA) must help those who are most at risk of displacement.   If we build 500 studios for example, we are ignoring the need for housing for families who have children. The majority of new units being built currently are one bedroom and studios. In fact,  I would wager up to 70%.  Still awaiting that figure from OSPCD. 

Those who can afford a studio apartment for $2,200 are not in a housing crisis. The over 2,000 units that has been built since 2020 and the continued housing development approved every two weeks in the planning board are providing for that demographic. 

I’m terribly concerned with helping the people who live here to be able to stay here.  Let’s get that inclusionary number to 40% and have that conversation. 

Reminder that DSNC has the cards here. This project will not go forward until it has your support. 

Tori

(Saying hi from Union Square) 

Victoria Antonino

Victorious Gardens

to...@victoriousgardens.com

(781) 964-6873

Organic Ecological Landscaping

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/CAB%2BRM3%2BSnrb6Gbqi9ycgwc8gwWF1SiRYMwUEwUPhaNts7t8FLA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Dan Ehrlich.dan]

Parking: 

We know that, for weekend use, the demographic that can afford these units Will have cars. They can afford them. The data on comparables shows more than 1 car per unit. 

A 500-unit building will create a Market for 500 cars. This is met by any means available - increased cost to existing residents at garages, illegal use of vistor's passes, lobbying at town hall to relax restrictions, perhaps if we wait long enough some new parking lots (although 500 is a lot). The point is that it is Somerville residents not the developer who will pay these costs.

This is what people are saying about scale. If you build at the scale of Kendall Square or Boston, you get Kendall Square or Boston. It is how we destroy the local color and character of our cities.

My view is that Davis has real character that will make it a success in the long term - IF we do not destroy it.

Best,

Dan

[PJ Santos]

Hi Toni, 

Great suggestions for CBA negotiation ideas, and of course thanks to USNC for being so supportive. 

The unit breakdown is in the PEL letter (Documents | Davis Square 40B Project | SomerVoice https://voice.somervillema.gov/31446/widgets/110802/documents/77142) it is roughly 50% affordable studios as you mentioned.

One counterpoint, 80% AMI units can be and often are combined with section 8 vouchers to give a wider range of people access to Somerville.

Because of the profit limitations of 40B, getting up to 40% subsidized may be tricky, but I like the idea of trying to shift around the unit balance to get more subsidized larger units. 

I'd also argue that the 376 market rate units will help the housing crisis. Those households need to live somewhere, and given that they can afford a new building that means they'll otherwise likely be out bidding someone else for an apartment in Somerville.

Additionally, part of the reason why we're in this mess is we didn't build any housing 30 years ago. 30 years from now, this building would be a lot more affordable so our kids won't need to deal with the same housing crisis that we do now. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/CAD6eCtX_-EkUDqaua%3DMmzA%3D1Ct%3Dq8SGdXyTYWqg8uG8kOnyO5w%40mail.gmail.com.

[PJ Santos]

Hi Dan, 

I don't think it is true that this building would add 500 cars. The comparable buildings in Union and Central don't seem to have dramatically changed the parking demand of those neighborhoods (subjectively). 

I haven't heard of massive outbreaks of 100s of cases of illegal visitor pass usage or any lobbying at city hall for changing the rules, has anyone else encountered this? 

From all the complaints I hear from friends who got tickets in Somerville, our parking enforcement division is decent at their jobs. If these new residents broke the rules regularly I feel pretty confident they would end up making some sizable contributions to our city budget. 

There would probably be increased competition for garage space or private driveway rentals. My hope is this would encourage fewer people to own cars in a city that is so well connected by transit (full disclosure, I am a hypocrite here as I have a car that I occasionally drive!) 

Finally, I think the neighborhood character of Davis comes from the people who live here. If we keep displacing anyone who is not wealthy from our neighborhood, we'll soon have the "Kendall Square" atmosphere you dislike. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/CAA1eyhWtueAQJ7OnkXNj3KS501gL5byn%3DnrCTMBEXo6P3rhnGQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Rebecca Rogers]

Thanks for expanding the conversation to Reddit, that was a great idea.

My two cents on the building height issue: as a pedestrian walking around the city, the part of a building that has the biggest impact on me is the portion that directly abuts the sidewalk.  One of the things I like about the current plan for the tower is that it has a lower 3 story height immediately abutting the sidewalk.  This is the part of the building that I think I experience most directly.  Then the tower is set back, in a way that I don’t think would impact me as much as I go about my business in the square.  

I know folks seem to be more in favor of a shorter building, 8-15 stories depending on who you talk to.  But my assumption is that a shorter building will bring the full height of a new (shorter) building right up to the sidewalk.  I’d rather have a 3-story height along the sidewalk than a 8-15 story height (depending on how it goes).  I’m reminded of the seaport, where the height of the neighborhood was restricted so all of the buildings go right up to the sidewalk to maximize the available building space.  Walking along a solid curtain of a 13-story wall going straight up is less appealing to me. 

Anyway, this is a long way of saying, I’m ok with a tower because I think it’s an ok trade-off for lower height along Elm St.  But I’m hearing that the height of the highest part of the building seems to be just as important or more to many others.  If folks prefer a different shape I can live with that.

My real hope is that we’ll be able to negotiate some valuable benefits for city residents.  For example, I dream of living in a city with a nice big community space that residents can book for meetings of all sizes (like the DSNC!).    

--Rebecca

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/CAEDUMSyGy9JXmUs0HPmEv6%3Dg5oTJvYhoj7rncmpgtBHe1hFTHg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Elizabeth Merrick]

Completely agree with your points, Dan. In addition to the parking issues, scale and streetscape characteristics really matter and create sense of place. 

As always, I feel I have to say that like most of us I very much want to see more affordable housing. I just refuse to see this as an All or nothing proposition - false choice being pushed upon us by developer.   I'm sure we could put in very substantial new housing that would yield a lot of affordable units, without sacrificing so much of our neighborhood square. And in my opinion, imagining that if a big tower goes up here, that would be the last one in Davis is highly naive. 

Elizabeth Merrick 

Get Outlook for Android

---

From: daviss...@googlegroups.com <daviss...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Dan Ehrlich.dan <ehrli...@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 5, 2026 7:30:57 AM
To: Mieke Citroen <mie...@gmail.com>
Cc: Christopher Beland <bel...@alum.mit.edu>; Carol <crego...@aol.com>; Davis Square Neighborhood Council <daviss...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [DSNC] 13-story and other alternatives for Copper Mill project

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/CAA1eyhWtueAQJ7OnkXNj3KS501gL5byn%3DnrCTMBEXo6P3rhnGQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[David Booth]

On 2/5/26 11:27, Rebecca Rogers wrote:
> Thanks for expanding the conversation to Reddit, that was a great idea.

I do not think the reddit thread is helpful at all. First, it means
that people have to look in two places instead of one, to follow the
conversation. Second, there seems to be little or no moderation there
to keep the conversation respectful and constructive.

It only takes a few rants like "Screw NIMBYs", and calling people who
disagree "racist morons" to kill the tone of a conversation. That kind
of bullying harassment alienates people instead of encouraging
inclusiveness and constructive engagement.

Thanks,
David Booth

[Colin McMillen]

"imagining that if a big tower goes up here, that would be the last one in Davis is highly naive"

This is just the slippery-slope fallacy, right? Approving this tower now doesn't imply that we'd forced to continue approving every tower proposal that comes up. We can make different decisions later to support a variety of heights and uses, as fits the neighborhood.

I don't think there's any other developer in the area who owns a comparatively large chunk of land in the heart of Davis Square. Most of the blocks surrounding Davis Square are standard Somerville triple-deckers owned by individuals who aren't gonna pool together and build a new high-rise on top of their current homes. I don't think it's likely that a significantly similar project is going to be proposed or approved any time in the next five years. (Heck, *this* process is almost 2 years along and is still at the "PowerPoint slides" stage of development.)

This is a *very* different situation than the developments at Assembly and the Seaport, which were built on areas that were abandoned industrial sites and/or via filling in land from the ocean. 

Colin

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/7C23A133-4D20-1647-B229-F6AA35EE38A9%40hxcore.ol.

[Ashish Shrestha]

Hi Dan, 

Could you please cite which building you're talking about when youre talking about comparables?  Specifically a large apartment building without parking?

Thanks,

Ashish

[Christopher Beland]

On Thu, 2026-02-05 at 11:34 -0500, Elizabeth Merrick wrote:

I'm sure we could put in very substantial new housing that would yield a lot of affordable units, without sacrificing so much of our neighborhood square.

I'm trying not to pester everyone, but the first question Copper Mill would have if we asked for "not a tower but substantial new housing" is what we mean by "substantial". In other words: what height and width are you willing to say "yes" to, assuming it came with a robust package of your favorite community benefits?

-B.

[ebm...@comcast.net]

I don't know that voicing every person's individual preference on specific height on this email list will be useful at all...it could just spark unproductive arguments and lectures... but thank you for asking! I appreciate your constructive tone and approach.

Just speaking for myself, I'd like to see maximum height of 6 stories in the middle of Davis. Elm Street is a relatively narrow street (not a Mass Ave for example) and I'd like to see the square overall retain local neighborhood center appearance with 4, 5 and 6 stories max.  Not sure about the width part. As far as design, again just personally, I'd like to see a building design that is not monolithic in appearance - maybe some variation, demarcation, detail would accomplish that.

Elizabeth

---

From: Christopher Beland <bel...@alum.mit.edu>
Sent: Friday, February 6, 2026 5:06 AM
To: Elizabeth Merrick <ebm...@comcast.net>
Cc: Davis Square Neighborhood Council <daviss...@googlegroups.com>

Subject: Re: [DSNC] 13-story and other alternatives for Copper Mill project

 

On Thu, 2026-02-05 at 11:34 -0500, Elizabeth Merrick wrote:

[alexcla...@gmail.com]

Thank you Elizabeth!

If we get the Davis Square Area Plan that the new mayor and City Planning promised during the election campaign this is exactly where the dialogue should and can take place. As a community we can establish agreed upon envelope and zoning criteria that will bring clarity and clear criteria that developers and parcel owners can then work towards “as of right”.

Remember that the City owns four empty (parking) parcels around the square that can and should be sold for development that will also help the housing fabric around the square. Something we should be requiring in a comprehensive plan.

The affordability crises, it’s not a housing crisis, as there are a multitude of issues driving this in the Greater Boston region and its certainly not just Somerville’s problem. Singular, high end development projects like this end up being detrimental to our local affordability. Somerville has and will continue to add more than our share of housing – but let’s do it on our terms – see Somervision.

For all the discussion regarding affordability in this chat no one seems to be zeroing in on the Trust’s obscene land valuation of $42m. Once an area plan is established, land owners and developers will work towards appropriate cost parameters.

Alex

 

From: 'ebm...@comcast.net' via Davis Square Neighborhood Council <daviss...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Friday, February 6, 2026 9:32 AM
To: Christopher Beland <bel...@alum.mit.edu>
Cc: Davis Square Neighborhood Council <daviss...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [DSNC] 13-story and other alternatives for Copper Mill project

 

I don't know that voicing every person's individual preference on specific height on this email list will be useful at all...it could just spark unproductive arguments and lectures... but thank you for asking! I appreciate your constructive tone and approach.

 

Just speaking for myself, I'd like to see maximum height of 6 stories in the middle of Davis. Elm Street is a relatively narrow street (not a Mass Ave for example) and I'd like to see the square overall retain local neighborhood center appearance with 4, 5 and 6 stories max.  Not sure about the width part. As far as design, again just personally, I'd like to see a building design that is not monolithic in appearance - maybe some variation, demarcation, detail would accomplish that.

 

Elizabeth

---

From: Christopher Beland <bel...@alum.mit.edu>
Sent: Friday, February 6, 2026 5:06 AM
To: Elizabeth Merrick <ebm...@comcast.net>
Cc: Davis Square Neighborhood Council <daviss...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [DSNC] 13-story and other alternatives for Copper Mill project

 

On Thu, 2026-02-05 at 11:34 -0500, Elizabeth Merrick wrote:

I'm sure we could put in very substantial new housing that would yield a lot of affordable units, without sacrificing so much of our neighborhood square.

I'm trying not to pester everyone, but the first question Copper Mill would have if we asked for "not a tower but substantial new housing" is what we mean by "substantial". In other words: what height and width are you willing to say "yes" to, assuming it came with a robust package of your favorite community benefits?

-B.

--

Davis Square Neighborhood Council · https://DavisSquareNC.org · https://linktr.ee/DavisSquareNC
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Davis Square Neighborhood Council" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to davissquaren...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/PH0PR17MB47834CADB60F6455735DB254FF66A%40PH0PR17MB4783.namprd17.prod.outlook.com.

[jlau...@comcast.net]

Colin McMillen wrote:

I don't think there's any other developer in the area who owns a comparatively large chunk of land in the heart of Davis Square.

IN POINT OF FACT,  ASANA, A SERIOUS NATIONAL DEVELOPER OUT OF NORTH CAROLINA, HAS EXTENSIVE HOLDINGS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF ELM STREET,  INCLUDING THE BUILDINGS ON BOTH SIDES OF WHAT THEY CALL "DAVIS SQUARE PLAZA"  STRETCHING ALL THE WAY ALONG DAY STREET TO HERBERT STREET PLUS CONTROL OF WHAT IS NOW THE H-MART BUILDING PLUS CONTROL OF SUFFICIENT PARKING IN THE DOVER/DAY LOT.   

(FOOTNOTE:  ASANA DISCLOSED THAT SEVERAL YEARS AGO THEY MADE  AN OFFER ON THE REMAINING PROPERTY SEPARATING THE H-MART HOLDING AND CHESTER STREET FROM THEIR PLAZA BUILDINGS, BUT THE LONGTIME OWNER SET TOO HIGH A PRICE.)

Colin further wrote:

 I don't think it's likely that a significantly similar project is going to be proposed or approved any time in the next five years.

ASANA, LIKE COPPER MILL, WAS FULLY PERMITTED TO PUT A LAB BUILDING ON ITS SITE.  THIS REQUIRED A ZONING CHANGE, WHICH WAS GRANTED AFTER ASANA AGREED TO ADMINISTER THE PLAZA AS A 24-HOUR ACCESSIBLE CIVIC PASSAGEWAY.  THE COLLAPSE OF THE LAB REAL ESTATE MARKET LEAVES ASANA, LIKE COPPER MILL, ON THE LOOKOUT FOR BETTER OPPORTUNITIES.

(FOOTNOTE: BECAUSE THE ASANA PLAZA IS NOT A DESIGNATED 'PEDESTRIAN STREET' DAN BARTMAN, THE CITY'S ZONING EXPERT, INFORMED ME SOME FOUR YEARS AGO THAT THE BUSINESSES BORDERING IT ARE EXEMPT FROM THE SMALL BUSINESS OVERLAY DESIGNED BY LANCE DAVIS AND BARTMAN HIMSELF.  THIS MEANS THAT ASANA CAN, BUT NEED NOT,HAVE AN ARCADE OF SMALL-FRONTAGE RETAIL ALONG BOTH SIDES OF THE PLAZA PASSAGEWAY.)

AS OF NOW, BOTH THE ASANA AND COPPER MILL HOLDINGS ARE ZONED TO EXCLUDE RESIDENTIAL USE.  40B COULD BE USED TO OVERRIDE CURRENT ZONING, BUT IT WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE TO DEPLOY THE 'GENERAL' ZONING CATEGORY THAT IS FLEXIBLE WITH RESPECT OFFICE, RETAIL AND RESIDENTIAL USE AND ALSO TO SET FLEXIBLE HEIGHT REGULATIONS EMBODYING  A  COHERENT AND COMPREHENSIVE  VISION FOR DAVIS-- RATHER THAN A SERIES OF ONE-OFF STRIP-MALL-TYPE DEALS.  THIS, AS I TAKE IT,  IS WHY THE DSNC HAS VOTED TO REQUEST THAT THE CITY EXERCISE ITS 'SAFE HARBOR' POWER TO DELAY 40B, SO THAT IT CAN COMPLETE A DAVIS SQUARE PLAN BEFORE LOCKING ITSELF INTO THE RIGID 40B TIMETABLE.  A MEASURED PLANNING/ZONING APPROACH DOES NOT PRECLUDE 'FRIENDLY' 40Bs THAT WOULD GIVE DEVELOPERS THE BENEFIT OF SUBSIDIZED INTEREST RATES IN RETURN FOR INCOME-RESTRICTED UNITS ABOVE SOMERVILLE'S MANDATORY 20%.  

FOOTNOTE: Do I remember correctly that there is a zoning provision that a property like Asana's bordering on a specified stretch of civic space (100 feet?) qualifies by right to add a tower to the existing four-story base?  I put this question to Dan Bartman a few weeks ago.  I'll report his response when it comes. 

Lee

_________________
Josiah Lee Auspitz
17 Chapel Street 

Somerville, MA 02144 

Landline phone: 617-628-6228 fax: 617-628-9441

Phones do not receive text messages

---

From: daviss...@googlegroups.com <daviss...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Xom>; Mieke Citroen <mie...@gmail.com>

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/19547494-7919-46bf-94ae-5a9477a82385%40app.fastmail.com.

[Alex Dehnert]

> Singular, high end development projects like this end up being
> detrimental to our local affordability.

Can you say more about why you believe that? Is there research you can
cite showing that projects like this worsen affordability?

As I noted in my email on another thread to this list about an hour ago
(and Jeff provided some more citations in reply), I think the research
generally shows[1] that even high-end development projects help with
local affordability (even -- especially -- at the low end of the market).

[1]
https://www.lewis.ucla.edu/2021/07/07/05-market-rate-development-and-neighborhood-rents-with-evan-mast/
is my go-to on this matter, but see Jeff and my emails for more

On 2/6/26 09:50, alexcla...@gmail.com wrote:
> Thank you Elizabeth!
>
> If we get the Davis Square Area Plan that the new mayor and City
> Planning promised during the election campaign this is exactly where the
> dialogue should and can take place. As a community we can establish
> agreed upon envelope and zoning criteria that will bring clarity and
> clear criteria that developers and parcel owners can then work towards
> “as of right”.
>
> Remember that the City owns four empty (parking) parcels around the
> square that can and should be sold for development that will also help
> the housing fabric around the square. Something we should be requiring
> in a comprehensive plan.
>
> The affordability crises, it’s not a housing crisis, as there are a
> multitude of issues driving this in the Greater Boston region and its
> certainly not just Somerville’s problem. Singular, high end development
> projects like this end up being detrimental to our local affordability.
> Somerville has and will continue to add more than our share of housing –
> but let’s do it on our terms – see Somervision.
>
> For all the discussion regarding affordability in this chat no one seems
> to be zeroing in on the Trust’s obscene land valuation of $42m. Once an
> area plan is established, land owners and developers will work towards
> appropriate cost parameters.
>
> Alex
>

> *From:*'ebm...@comcast.net' via Davis Square Neighborhood Council
> <daviss...@googlegroups.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, February 6, 2026 9:32 AM
> *To:* Christopher Beland <bel...@alum.mit.edu>
> *Cc:* Davis Square Neighborhood Council <daviss...@googlegroups.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [DSNC] 13-story and other alternatives for Copper Mill

> project
>
> I don't know that voicing every person's individual preference on
> specific height on this email list will be useful at all...it could just
> spark unproductive arguments and lectures... but thank you for asking! I
> appreciate your constructive tone and approach.
>
> Just speaking for myself, I'd like to see maximum height of 6 stories in
> the middle of Davis. Elm Street is a relatively narrow street (not a
> Mass Ave for example) and I'd like to see the square overall retain
> local neighborhood center appearance with 4, 5 and 6 stories max.  Not
> sure about the width part. As far as design, again just personally, I'd
> like to see a building design that is not monolithic in appearance -
> maybe some variation, demarcation, detail would accomplish that.
>
> Elizabeth
>

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:*Christopher Beland <bel...@alum.mit.edu <mailto:bel...@alum.mit.edu>>
> *Sent:* Friday, February 6, 2026 5:06 AM
> *To:* Elizabeth Merrick <ebm...@comcast.net <mailto:ebm...@comcast.net>>
> *Cc:* Davis Square Neighborhood Council <daviss...@googlegroups.com
> <mailto:daviss...@googlegroups.com>>
> *Subject:* Re: [DSNC] 13-story and other alternatives for Copper Mill

> project
>
> On Thu, 2026-02-05 at 11:34 -0500, Elizabeth Merrick wrote:
>
> I'm sure we could put in very substantial new housing that would
> yield a lot of affordable units, without sacrificing so much of our
> neighborhood square.
>
> I'm trying not to pester everyone, but the first question Copper Mill
> would have if we asked for "not a tower but substantial new housing" is
> what we mean by "substantial". In other words: what height and width are
> you willing to say "yes" to, assuming it came with a robust package of
> your favorite community benefits?
>
> -B.
>
> --
> Davis Square Neighborhood Council · https://DavisSquareNC.org <https://

> DavisSquareNC.org> · https://linktr.ee/DavisSquareNC <https://linktr.ee/
> DavisSquareNC>

> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Davis Square Neighborhood Council" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to davissquaren...@googlegroups.com

> <mailto:davissquaren...@googlegroups.com>.

> To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/
> davissquarenc/

> PH0PR17MB47834CADB60F6455735DB254FF66A%40PH0PR17MB4783.namprd17.prod.outlook.com <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/PH0PR17MB47834CADB60F6455735DB254FF66A%40PH0PR17MB4783.namprd17.prod.outlook.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

>
> --
> Davis Square Neighborhood Council · https://DavisSquareNC.org <https://

> DavisSquareNC.org> · https://linktr.ee/DavisSquareNC <https://linktr.ee/
> DavisSquareNC>

> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Davis Square Neighborhood Council" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to davissquaren...@googlegroups.com

> <mailto:davissquaren...@googlegroups.com>.

> To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/

> davissquarenc/04f601dc9778%24010ea940%24032bfbc0%24%40gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/
> davissquarenc/04f601dc9778%24010ea940%24032bfbc0%24%40gmail.com?
> utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

[Christopher Beland]

THE DSNC HAS VOTED TO REQUEST THAT THE CITY EXERCISE ITS 'SAFE HARBOR' POWER TO DELAY 40B, SO THAT IT CAN COMPLETE A DAVIS SQUARE PLAN BEFORE LOCKING ITSELF INTO THE RIGID 40B TIMETABLE.

We never voted to ask the city to assert Safe Harbor. We voted to ask the city to ask Copper Mill to withdraw their application completely until after the Davis Square Neighborhood Plan is complete. The formal letter implementing that vote is nearly ready to send.

-B.

[Frank Mals]

Chris thank you very much for the update on the letter.  If you have a draft to share that would be much appreciated.  

Also...go PATS!

Regards,

Frank

[Christopher Beland]

On Fri, 2026-02-06 at 20:39 +0000, Josiah Lee Auspitz wrote:

FOOTNOTE: Do I remember correctly that there is a zoning provision that a property like Asana's bordering on a specified stretch of civic space (100 feet?) qualifies by right to add a tower to the existing four-story base?  I put this question to Dan Bartman a few weeks ago.  I'll report his response when it comes. 

In the interest of quickly getting to the bottom of the rumors about Asana being able to build a tower by right, I poked through the Somerville Zoning Atlas and ordinances.

What I found:

• The open plaza is zoned Civic (CIV). There are no dimensional limitations, but nearly all residential and commercial uses prohibited. Allowed uses are city services, a minor utility facility (subject to a special permit), religious and educational uses protcted by MGL Ch. 40A Sec. 3, recreational camp for children, bike share parking, community farming, and community gardening.
• The buildings on either side are zoned Commercial Core 4 (CC4). Two types of building are allowed in this zone: Commercial Building and Commercial Block Building.
• For Commercial Building, there are some minor variations in setbacks and allowed height for mechanicals depending on abutting zone, but the maximum number of stories is always 4.
• For Commercial Block Building, the podium can be 3-6 stories, and the tower can be up to 10 stories.

I assume the Commercial Block Building tower is the scenario you're thinking of? From what I can tell this block is not eligible for that building type.

The minimum lot size for a Commercial Block Building is 200 ft by 250 ft, and it must have streets on opposite sides or face "at least three thoroughfares or civic spaces". There are plenty of abutting streets and there's the new CIV space, but the CR4 areas don't look big enough to support a Commercial Block Building by right. The Chipotle-Oath frontage looks to be only about 100 ft, and the Elm Street Taproom-Starbucks frontage is about the same. If the CIV was still CR4, there would be about combined 250 ft, but the distance between Elm Street and Herbert Street property lines looks to be only 175 feet.

-B.

[Mieke Citroen]

Thank you so much for that. I'm strongly in favor of quelling rumors and spreading facts.

--Mieke

--

Davis Square Neighborhood Council · https://DavisSquareNC.org · https://linktr.ee/DavisSquareNC
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Davis Square Neighborhood Council" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to davissquaren...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/59ecad80818d3af769d1cc1674a95bfb73ad4726.camel%40alum.mit.edu.

[Alex Dehnert]

FWIW, I could afford a car, but choose not to have one. It works fine.
(I don't have kids, which I gather might make living with a car harder,
but we've also talked at length about how Copper Mill's mostly-small
units will probably select for childless tenants.)

It strikes me as unlikely that most of the people choosing to move into
a building a block from the red line with no parking will own cars and
choose to illegally use visitor's passes or lobby to relax parking
restrictions -- that seems risky or time consuming given that the
majority of the city's housing stock will still be eligible for parking
permits, and they could live there instead. I expect that the people who
want parking will mostly pick other buildings to live in and Copper Mill
will select heavily for people without cars. Seems fine. Why pay for
parking (in higher construction costs leading to higher rent) when you
don't need it?

As for weekend use specifically: I imagine a bunch of these people will
have weekend activities (seeing plays, relaxing at home, traveling by
plane/train, biking, etc.) that don't require cars, and others will rent
a car (from a traditional company or Zipcar). Even for weekend
activities, cars really aren't required. (For some activities -- e.g.
hiking in the White Mountains -- they do help, but again, not all
buildings need to be for everyone, and rentals exist.)

(Do you have comparables in mind that are also very near a red line stop
and don't have parking? Or come close to that? Because all three of
those factors probably reduce the rate of car ownership, especially
together.)

~~Alex

On 2/5/26 07:30, Dan Ehrlich.dan wrote:
> Parking:
> We know that, for weekend use, the demographic that can afford these
> units Will have cars. They can afford them. The data on comparables
> shows more than 1 car per unit.
> A 500-unit building will create a Market for 500 cars. This is met by
> any means available - increased cost to existing residents at garages,
> illegal use of vistor's passes, lobbying at town hall to relax
> restrictions, perhaps if we wait long enough some new parking lots

> (although 500 is a lot). The point is that it is/Somerville residents
> not the developer who will pay these costs./

>
> This is what people are saying about scale. If you build at the scale of
> Kendall Square or Boston, you get Kendall Square or Boston. It is how we
> destroy the local color and character of our cities.
>
> My view is that Davis has real character that will make it a success in
> the long term - IF we do not destroy it.
> Best,
> Dan
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 4, 2026 at 7:25 PM Mieke Citroen <mie...@gmail.com
> <mailto:mie...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Here you are just hand waving wrong data. They are not allowed to
> get a Somerville parking permit. I sincerely doubt that there will
> be 500 cars looking for a parking space.
>
> --Mieke
>
> On Wed, Feb 4, 2026, 16:06 Dan Ehrlich.dan <ehrli...@gmail.com
> <mailto:ehrli...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> All hand-waving about mass transit aside, we already have pretty
> good data about the parking demands of a 500-unit building.
> Comparable condos selling in the price range we are discussing

> *in the Davis Square region* bring a little over one car per

> unit. This is just the fact. Can we imagine the stress on the
> square that would be put with 500 additional cars seeking
> overnight parking?
>
> This is a pretty good deal for the developer if they do not have
> to pay for the stress that would create. "Transform" seems to me
> to be the right word here.
> Dan
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 4, 2026 at 3:37 PM 'Christopher Beland' via Davis
> Square Neighborhood Council <daviss...@googlegroups.com

> <mailto:daviss...@googlegroups.com>> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2026-02-04 at 19:42 +0000, Carol wrote:
>
>> As you all know, I am not in favor of a building that is
>> so out of character for the neighborhood. I consider 26
>> stories as excessive.
>>
> How do you feel about the proposed alternative of 500 units
> in 13 stories?
>
> -B.
>
> --

> Davis Square Neighborhood Council · https://
> DavisSquareNC.org <https://DavisSquareNC.org> · https://

> linktr.ee/DavisSquareNC <https://linktr.ee/DavisSquareNC>

> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the
> Google Groups "Davis Square Neighborhood Council" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails
> from it, send an email to
> davissquaren...@googlegroups.com

> <mailto:davissquaren...@googlegroups.com>.

> To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/
> msgid/davissquarenc/

> f6b2d6a214f6072cbe28bac4206adadd570305d4.camel%40alum.mit.edu <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/f6b2d6a214f6072cbe28bac4206adadd570305d4.camel%40alum.mit.edu?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

>
> --
> Davis Square Neighborhood Council · https://DavisSquareNC.org

> <https://DavisSquareNC.org> · https://linktr.ee/DavisSquareNC

> <https://linktr.ee/DavisSquareNC>
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the
> Google Groups "Davis Square Neighborhood Council" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from
> it, send an email to davissquaren...@googlegroups.com

> <mailto:davissquaren...@googlegroups.com>.

> To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/
> davissquarenc/

> CAA1eyhXCLMsm6%3D3GC-4FCxOAZqzbf07a%2BLNRBBbs7rmDbwA0mg%40mail.gmail.com <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/CAA1eyhXCLMsm6%3D3GC-4FCxOAZqzbf07a%2BLNRBBbs7rmDbwA0mg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
>
> --

> Davis Square Neighborhood Council · https://DavisSquareNC.org <https://
> DavisSquareNC.org> · https://linktr.ee/DavisSquareNC <https://linktr.ee/
> DavisSquareNC>

> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Davis Square Neighborhood Council" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to davissquaren...@googlegroups.com

> <mailto:davissquaren...@googlegroups.com>.

> To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/
> davissquarenc/

> CAA1eyhWtueAQJ7OnkXNj3KS501gL5byn%3DnrCTMBEXo6P3rhnGQ%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/
> CAA1eyhWtueAQJ7OnkXNj3KS501gL5byn%3DnrCTMBEXo6P3rhnGQ%40mail.gmail.com?
> utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

[Michael Chiu]

Alex,

The zero parking aspect of the general discussion re: Davis development is one that doesn't quite make sense to me.  

Understood that many people can live quite comfortably without owning a car and this is easier due to proximity of public transport, bike lanes, etc... This is great for them at that time in their life.  However, life and priorities can change; your job might move to the suburbs, you might have to support an elderly parent or maybe you become disabled (or old).   If any of these happen, does it mean that you have to move out as there are no options for a car?  For many, cars aren't a convenience or a form of recreation, they are a component of their livelihood. 

For me, having a building with zero parking means that we have structurally chosen to house only a certain type/class of resident.   This isn't to say that that type of resident is bad or good, but rather, that the structure is fairly rigid and may not accommodate change as the city evolves; a building that is majority studio/1-bedroom seems to have a similar brittleness.  Contrast this to a typical Somerville 2-family that can accommodate a single large family, a 'mother-in-law' apartment, a tenant, can be broken into 3 condos, expanded to a 4-unit, etc...  With each stage, the number of parking spots might also change.  If our goal is to build housing that promotes stable, long-term residents, then we need to make sure that it is flexible enough to accommodate life's changes.  

I'm not advocating for 2 or even 1 parking spot per unit, but zero doesn't make sense to me.  It also feels like a failure to acknowledge that there are many valid ways to live in Somerville.  

Michael

Davis Square Neighborhood Council · https://DavisSquareNC.org · https://linktr.ee/DavisSquareNC

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Davis Square Neighborhood Council" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to davissquaren...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/997ca11d-0fc6-48ac-99d9-44e88e6e179e%40dehnerts.com.

[PJ Santos]

Copper Mill seems to think they can fill this building with high paying tenants who won't want cars. If they're wrong, they'll lose millions of dollars. 

Say what you will about the wonders of capitalism, it does incentivize sellers to accurately gauge what potential buyers will want. 

In Somerville there are many buildings you can live with an off street parking spot, not every building needs to be everything to all people. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/CAKhjUPcq8%2BeA%3DYZmcyu_ZLAQkdMD9tTKbkVR1y%2BdimBL_w1G1A%40mail.gmail.com.

[PJ Santos]

I think one of us has misunderstood the other's point. 

If the augment is we need to mandate parking because some potential tenants will want to drive, my point is that Copper Mill has concluded that isn't true. If they're wrong, they'll have to lower their prices and lose money, which I think would be good. 

There are lots of aspects of the project I think it make sense for us to have a say in, but micromanaging parking isn't one of them. 

If the argument is we as the community should force them to build parking because we want more car owners living in Davis Square, then I strongly disagree with you. 

More broadly, it's clearly false that this is choosing "to house only a certain type/class of resident". There are thousands of apartments with parking within a mile of Davis Square. 

On Mon, Feb 9, 2026, 9:10 AM Michael Chiu <michael...@gmail.com> wrote:

PJ,

I think that the entire point of the online discussion is determine what the community wants so that we don't have to accept what Copper Mill prefers.  Ceding the decision to 'capitalism' seems like a false argument, especially for someone who is on the board of DSNC, who's explicit mission is to represent the interests of the community in discussion with developers.  

Agreed that there are many other buildings in Somerville that can meet the diverse needs of the community.  However, 500 units in Davis Square will have a big impact on the community.  Waving off a concern by saying that some other, unknown development in the future will address an expressed concern seems insincere.

[Michael Chiu]

PJ,

I think that the entire point of the online discussion is determine what the community wants so that we don't have to accept what Copper Mill prefers.  Ceding the decision to 'capitalism' seems like a false argument, especially for someone who is on the board of DSNC, who's explicit mission is to represent the interests of the community in discussion with developers.  

Agreed that there are many other buildings in Somerville that can meet the diverse needs of the community.  However, 500 units in Davis Square will have a big impact on the community.  Waving off a concern by saying that some other, unknown development in the future will address an expressed concern seems insincere.

On Mon, Feb 9, 2026 at 8:32 AM PJ Santos <peej...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Colin McMillen]

Among my friends who rent, they tend to end up moving every 2-3 years anyways, because landlords jack up the rents to untenable values. When I was a renter in the area, and carless, I would gladly have paid less to not also have a useless-to-me parking spot. I trust that anyone who's pondering moving into the Copper Mill development will be able to analyze that tradeoff for themselves. And at any rate if they regret their decision and want to buy a car, yes they might have to move, but there's a bunch of other reasons why renters move every couple years anyways, and "affordability" is a much bigger one than access to parking.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/CAKhjUPfTmFhga8xsdqgic74btbfyDOwdmPJ%2B5R7CL7eDXrm7Yw%40mail.gmail.com.

[David Booth]

On 2/9/26 08:02, Michael Chiu wrote:
> The zero parking aspect of the general discussion re: Davis development
> is one that doesn't quite make sense to me.
>
> Understood that many people can live quite comfortably without owning a
> car and this is easier due to proximity of public transport, bike lanes,
> etc... This is great for them at that time in their life.  However, life
> and priorities can change; your job might move to the suburbs, you might
> have to support an elderly parent or maybe you become disabled (or
> old).   If any of these happen, does it mean that you have to move out
> as there are no options for a car?

If someone knowingly chose to live in a car-free apartment, and later
decides they want a car because of a job change, then they can move.
I'm okay with that.

Caring for a disabled person is different. I think it would be
reasonable for Copper Mill to include handicap parking, and perhaps also
some parking for short-term use (e.g., no or limited overnight use).

However, I think the most important consideration is to prohibit parking
from being *bundled* with housing, because bundling *encourages* car use.

> For many, cars aren't a convenience
> or a form of recreation, they are a component of their livelihood.

Agreed. But I do not think we should make accommodations for car
reliant people to live virtually on top of a major public transport hub,
because that housing would much better serve people who are not car reliant.

Thanks,
David Booth

[Deborah Pacini]

I’ve been following these conversations with interest, but haven’t commented yet. IMHO the car issue should not only be about parking, but more about the effect on street traffic of people with or without cars. 500 units are likely to generate hundreds of cars delivering food, packages, Uber/Lyft pickups/dropoffs, and so on, not to mention the problems that will be experienced by others who provide services to residents in the building when there’s not enough parking nearby, e.g. appliance repair people, home health aides, house cleaners, guests invited to a dinner party, and so on. Davis square is already experiencing the problem of cars double parking for pickups and deliveries, so I imagine what it will look like when hundreds more people needing services move in. I’d be interested in hearing others’ thoughts about this.
Best,
Deb

> --
> Davis Square Neighborhood Council · https://DavisSquareNC.org · https://linktr.ee/DavisSquareNC
> --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Davis Square Neighborhood Council" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to davissquaren...@googlegroups.com.

> To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/7006296f-06d5-4be0-b942-e54a8295a131%40dbooth.org.

[Frank]

I think the food delivery people solve this by using mopeds and ebikes instead of cars.

Home attendant and PCA parking, and parking for contractors is still an unresolved concern, however.

FWIW: I’m a DSNC member and I’m generally in favor of the tower, as long as we actually get 25% permanently affordable units. My concern is: what fraction of the building will be fully accessible for people with disabilities?

Frank

> On Feb 9, 2026, at 11:20 AM, Deborah Pacini <debp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I’ve been following these conversations with interest, but haven’t commented yet. IMHO the car issue should not only be about parking, but more about the effect on street traffic of people with or without cars. 500 units are likely to generate hundreds of cars delivering food, packages, Uber/Lyft pickups/dropoffs, and so on, not to mention the problems that will be experienced by others who provide services to residents in the building when there’s not enough parking nearby, e.g. appliance repair people, home health aides, house cleaners, guests invited to a dinner party, and so on. Davis square is already experiencing the problem of cars double parking for pickups and deliveries, so I imagine what it will look like when hundreds more people needing services move in. I’d be interested in hearing others’ thoughts about this.

> To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/4528D06E-EA7E-4091-89AA-1FC9CFC3FB78%40gmail.com.

[Colin McMillen]

My understanding of the ADA is that any new building of that height would need to have fully-accessible elevators and rooms that are "adaptable" to wheelchair users.

This is also a net win compared to older housing stock such as standard Somerville triple-deckers, which don't require elevators due to pre-dating the ADA, *and* which typically have a front door a half-floor above street level, which means that even ground floor units can be inaccessible to most wheelchair users unless specific adaptations have been built out (or if there's a back door that's actually at ground level.)

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/447B21A7-ACA6-4B93-AF12-C2287B8A5F26%40gmail.com.

[Mieke Citroen]

I suspect that whatever gets built, the traffic and parking situation around the square will change. One of the current major issues already is the double parking, especially cars picking up takeout. Unfortunately I agree that adding that many more households to the square will add more delivery issues. 

At the same time, it is an **existing** issue that needs to be addressed independently of whatever housing gets built there. 

So let's work on finding a solution for this existing issue, while obviously looking ahead at the added complexity with some tower in the near future. 

--Mieke

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/447B21A7-ACA6-4B93-AF12-C2287B8A5F26%40gmail.com.

[Alan Moore]

been reading all the month's posts with interest.

 

I agree with David and think these are important points to consider with regard to the car parking issue.

 

Does anyone have any data on car ownership at Assembly for residents there? With all the parking there, renters who require a car can choose there.

 

Alan

 

If someone knowingly chose to live in a car-free apartment, and later

decides they want a car because of a job change, then they can move.

I'm okay with that.

 

Caring for a disabled person is different. I think it would be

reasonable for Copper Mill to include handicap parking, and perhaps also

some parking for short-term use (e.g., no or limited overnight use).

 

However, I think the most important consideration is to prohibit parking

from being *bundled* with housing, because bundling *encourages* car use.

--

Davis Square Neighborhood Council · https://DavisSquareNC.org · https://linktr.ee/DavisSquareNC

---

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Davis Square Neighborhood Council" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to davissquaren...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/7006296f-06d5-4be0-b942-e54a8295a131%40dbooth.org.

[hu...@comcast.net]

Are the questions Deb raises what people who fear the proposed project is out of scale with the current square are concerned about? It seems to me that this post poses questions that get at where the rubber hits the road (both literally and metaphorically) for this project. What will be the effects on the texture of life for all residents of Davis Square, both in the proposed tower and in the surrounding area? These questions at the very least deserve a careful, independent analysis.

Thank you, Deb, for raising these important points.

-Hume

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/4528D06E-EA7E-4091-89AA-1FC9CFC3FB78%40gmail.com.

[Dan Ehrlich.dan]

Parking / Social Engineering:

Actually we have the data and it proves the opposite. For renters in this price range the average is slightly more than 1 car per unit.

One of the assets of living here is that, unlike NYC for example, people can enjoy the countryside. If you have the money, you want a car.

Best,

Dan

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/1529593913.117149.1770653677437%40mailbusiness.ionos.com.

[Elizabeth Merrick]

Speaking of cars, even aside from the parking issue, I'm still trying to wrap my mind around what someone else brought up recently: the vehicle log jams and problems that would be created simply by deliveries, even apart from the park (which I believe is a serious issue ).

 500 new households jammed into one block, I can just picture the Amazon, FedEx, UPS, USPS, grocery, restaurant and retail delivery vehicles on our narrow streets in Davis!  How many ways can we say "out of scale for this neighborhood"!

Elizabeth Merrick 

Get Outlook for Android

From: daviss...@googlegroups.com <daviss...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Dan Ehrlich.dan <ehrli...@gmail.com>

Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2026 8:51:59 AM
To: Alan Moore <al...@pathfriends.org>
Cc: David Booth <da...@dbooth.org>; daviss...@googlegroups.com <daviss...@googlegroups.com>

Subject: Re: [DSNC] 13-story and other alternatives for Copper Mill project

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/CAA1eyhUdYDbCHJAf7Dzead%2BPR9y0KCmP7FAkKuaXaEXQeRa61g%40mail.gmail.com.

[Colin McMillen]

A thought experiment: how different would this be from a Plan B in which 500 units of housing are magically added *elsewhere* within the Davis neighborhood?

On average, people who live directly in the heart of Davis Square are probably *less* likely to order delivery than people who are living 10-15 minutes' walk away, because they live close enough that they can just drop down and pick something up within 5 minutes, rather than waiting longer for colder food and paying expensive delivery fees. So the double-parking in front of restaurants to pick up delivery orders might be *less* with the tower than if we added +500 units spread-out through the neighborhood. But you're absolutely right that the tower *itself* risks being a chokepoint if there's a rush of deliveries at peak time (which unfortunately, peak dinnertime significantly overlaps with peak commute hours).

I'd like to see a proposal that mitigates the potential effect of delivery vehicles while leaving the housing in place -- perhaps a hotel-like U-shaped driveway with something like 10 off-street short-term parking spots just for loading and unloading of deliveries and passenger pickup. That could help solve the potential vehicle-congestion problem without wasting a bunch of space on a giant parking lot.

Clearly the least-traffic option would be "don't add any housing at all", but that's a different argument and not one I could agree with.

(As a point of reference: according to census data, about 25,000 people live within the Davis square area, so if there's on average 2 people in 500 new units, that's +1000 residents and only a 4% expected increase in population & traffic compared to right now.)

Colin

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/BE456082-D46A-C24B-8A98-EB81AB8B374E%40hxcore.ol.

[Elizabeth Merrick]

I haven't heard anybody propose a zero new affordable housing scenario. I feel like that's a straw man argument. There's a lot in between 0 and 500 units, large majority of which would be not affordable anyway.

I still think the intense concentration of the additional 500 households would create major problems within the square. I doubt there are 25,000 people who live right in Davis Square, they're obviously spread out around the area. Dispersion of new housing into smaller projects would be much preferable in my view. For many reasons. And how about not all 500 units of new housing need to be only in Davis.

Get Outlook for Android

---

From: Colin McMillen <colin.m...@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2026 11:14:59 AM
To: Elizabeth Merrick <ebm...@comcast.net>; Dan Ehrlich.dan <ehrli...@gmail.com>; Alan Moore <al...@pathfriends.org>

[Christopher Beland]

On Wed, 2026-02-04 at 11:41 -0500, Victoria Antonino wrote:

I’m terribly concerned with helping the people who live here to be able to stay here.  Let’s get that inclusionary number to 40% and have that conversation. 

Bumping the affordable housing from 25% to 40% would permanently cut $2 million per year from building rent, representing a 24% reduction in profit. I'm not sure how many people would keep doing the same job if their pay was cut by a quarter; that would be a huge ask.

-B.

[David Booth]

On 2/10/26 09:46, Michael Chiu wrote:
> . . .
> A 500 unit building also needs visitor parking, unless we restrict
> residents to only having friends and family who use public
> transportation and live within a 5 mile radius.   It also needs parking
> for staff and service providers.  We may not think about them in terms
> of housing policy, but housecleaners need to park somewhere - tough to
> take your vacuum on the T.  Home health aides move between multiple
> patients a day, repair and maintenance folks too; . . .

Totally agree. I think we need to carefully distinguish
short-term/visitor parking from general purpose monthly parking. I
think it is important to include short-term/visitor parking.

> Note that none of these 'service economy' people would be able to live
> in this building, not just due to the cost, but without parking they
> would not be able to hold a job that requires a car.  My preference is
> that we find a way to include these people too, not just from an
> affordability perspective, but from a practical/logistical one as well.

That worries me. If the building were to offer monthly parking for
residents who "need" cars for their jobs, I fear that such a system
would be far too easy to abuse, because almost anyone could make a
plausible argument for "needing" their car.

Thanks,
David Booth

[Beth Kevles]

I believe the City has a mechanism in place already for determining need. 

--Beth 

--
Davis Square Neighborhood Council · https://DavisSquareNC.org · https://linktr.ee/DavisSquareNC
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Davis Square Neighborhood Council" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to davissquaren...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/8e79db1a-4e8d-403c-a4b1-3f6aa3683108%40dbooth.org.

[Christopher Beland]

On Mon, 2026-02-09 at 12:12 -0500, Frank (fiddle...@gmail.com) wrote:

what fraction of the building will be fully accessible for people with disabilities?

The Copper Mill 40B application says that 5% of the building will be "Handicapped Accessible Units", 18 market-rate and 7 income-restricted.

This conforms to 521 CMR 9.4, which requires 5% of units meet the Group 2A accessibility standard (in all rental apartment buildings with 20 or more units). These are designed to be suitable without modification for a person using a wheelchair.

521 CMR 9.3 requires the remaining apartments on all floors (because this building has elevators) to meet the Group 1 accessibility standard, so that the apartment would be suitable for a person using a wheelchair after modification.

CMR is the Code of Massachusetts Regulations, which from what I gather is stricter than the federal minimums. From what I read, the federal law that applies to private apartment buildings is actually the Fair Housing Act as amended in 1988. The Americans with Disabilities Act came two years later and added requirements for hotels and commercial buildings, and there are other rules for federally owned or funded facilities.

If you are curious exactly what is required for Group 1 and Group 2A, you can find 521 CMR in its entirety here: https://www.mass.gov/lists/521-cmr-2006-edition

-B.

[Ashish Shrestha]

Hi Dan,

Again, what data regarding buildings that do not come with off-site parking permits or on-site garages and are adjacent to mass transit ate you referring to?  Please cite sources as saying things like "data claims" without a source degenerates conversations to unsubstantiated claims and inhibits useful debate.

Thanks

Ashish

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Davis Square Neighborhood Council" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/davissquarenc/4q94ukD0Elc/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to davissquaren...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/CAA1eyhUdYDbCHJAf7Dzead%2BPR9y0KCmP7FAkKuaXaEXQeRa61g%40mail.gmail.com.

[Michael Chiu]

This is a good discussion; few follow-up thoughts:

David Booth wrote: "If someone knowingly chose to live in a car-free apartment, and later decides they want a car because of a job change, then they can move.  I'm okay with that."

• If accepting that people with job changes must move out is OK, then what other trade-offs are we willing to accept in determining who gets to live in Somerville?  I'm not advocating for anything specific, only want to point out that those who have passionate beliefs regarding the 'correct' approach to housing are merely expressing their preferences, just like the rest of us.    

I do think that there is a reasonable compromise on the parking issue specifically.  I definitely agree with the 'unbundling' of parking and also support a much lower parking spot/unit ratio (perhaps between 0.5 and 1).  

A 500 unit building also needs visitor parking, unless we restrict residents to only having friends and family who use public transportation and live within a 5 mile radius.   It also needs parking for staff and service providers.  We may not think about them in terms of housing policy, but housecleaners need to park somewhere - tough to take your vacuum on the T.  Home health aides move between multiple patients a day, repair and maintenance folks too; and given the pricing of the luxury units, this probably includes personal chefs!  Per the current plan, I assume that they circle Davis Square to find street parking? 

Note that none of these 'service economy' people would be able to live in this building, not just due to the cost, but without parking they would not be able to hold a job that requires a car.  My preference is that we find a way to include these people too, not just from an affordability perspective, but from a practical/logistical one as well.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/CAA1eyhUdYDbCHJAf7Dzead%2BPR9y0KCmP7FAkKuaXaEXQeRa61g%40mail.gmail.com.

[AlanMoore]

Could Dan or someone please send a link to this parking data that is being referenced?

I would think it would need to be in Somerville or Cambridge or Boston for a large rental building near transit. That's why I brought up the assembly Sq example. 

Also, what is the parking utilization rate in the public parking lot around Davis Square?

The couple of times when I've driven to Davis Square , I've never had any problem finding parking in those lots. 

So wouldn't that be the most likely option for both residence and visitors? 

Alan

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 10, 2026, at 9:46 AM, Michael Chiu <michael...@gmail.com> wrote:



[Zev Pogrebin]

Hi all,

Chiming in about parking:

Is it unreasonable to expect that people may need to move when they find a new job? I currently live in such a way that I can ensure a quick and relatively painless commute to work. If my job changed I would likely have a different commute and, depending on the location, would try to find a new place to live.

I don't think a 500 unit building needs visitor parking. Visitors do not necessarily need to park on-site. When I have friends visiting me from car dependent suburbs or other regions with their car, I typically recommend them to park at Alewife and take the T, which generally saves them a lot of hassle and time. There is also plenty of paid parking in the area that they can avail themselves of, or they can also use ride-hailing services. I'm not saying that this is a one-size fits all problem, but the answer is that there are many ways to get to Davis Square, of which only one is driving your personal vehicle to an on-site parking space within your destination.

Regarding cleaning staff, home health aids, service workers, and the like, I think that these people will typically be coming into the square at daytime/weekday hours. When I walk around Davis Square, I notice that parking demand is relatively limited and a glut of parking spaces are empty during weekdays. As Alan said, it would be really helpful to get some concrete numbers on parking utilization of the various lots around Davis Square and possibly ask Copper Mill if they modeled any tenant demographics, on which we could try to look into the quantity and types of services that would be used by tenants.

Overall, I would just ask the following: why do people think that Copper Mill is avoiding putting parking in their building if it will not be possible for tenants to live, see friends and family, hire people for the services they need, etc? Do people think that Copper Mill is attempting to foist this problem onto the public domain? Or is it that they're making an error in their modeling of who will rent these apartments?

Best,

Zev

[Christopher Beland]

I meant to add, the state Architectural Access Board can apparently require up to 10% of units be Group 2A, if there is a documented need for more than 5% in a certain part of the state. I don't know if they have ever done that or if they publish regulations like that in advance or if someone has to file a complaint and ask for that for a specific building. This is also something that the ZBA can ask for more of, but it would be helpful to know what the actual need is right now in Somerville.

-B.