Developer Copper Mill released revised designs for a proposed Davis Square tower, keeping density central while reshaping the podium and pedestrian area.
A proposed 26-story residential tower in Somerville’s Davis Square is back in the conversation after its developer released new alternative designs this week.
The plan. associated with Copper Mill. centers on a 500-unit building and revises the tower’s “massing” and street-level experience rather than dramatically reducing its overall scale.. That shift matters in a neighborhood where residents say they want more housing near transit—but also want Davis Square to feel like Davis Square.
Copper Mill submitted its initial Chapter 40B proposal in December. seeking permission to build under more flexible affordable-housing rules if at least a fifth of the units were affordable.. That application was denied, according to Misryoum reporting.. Now the developer has responded with three revised options plus the original 26-story concept. which would place the tower set back from Elm Street.
The revisions do not amount to a full retreat on height.. One alternative would lower the tower to 25 stories over a four-story podium. with a “more compact tower form.” Another design steps down across three connected towers—24 floors. 23 floors. and 17 floors—above a three-story base.. A fourth option keeps similarly tall components at 24. 13. and 15 stories. arranged as interlocked towers rather than a single profile tapering down.
Copper Mill owner Andrew Flynn said the changes are meant to address community requests. specifically by “completely redesigned the pedestrian realm and the podium with masonry and brick.” In his statement. Flynn framed the updates as an attempt to align with shared goals: transit-oriented housing. affordable housing production. thousands of union construction jobs. and preserving existing retail tenants.. He also emphasized “density remains a key component of feasibility. ” signaling that housing production is still the main driver behind whichever design moves forward.
That messaging lands in a place where opposition has been visible and sustained.. Several Davis Square businesses—including The Burren. Dragon Pizza. McKinnon’s Meat Market. Martsa on Elm. and Kung Fu Tea—have faced impacts from the proposal. with some locations temporarily affected and others permanently.. Residents have also criticized how the project would reshape the area’s feel, not just its footprint.
At a community meeting last month. Misryoum notes that residents voiced objections after reviewing renderings and debating the project’s unit mix.. The tone was confrontational, with boos directed at proposed visuals and repeated emphasis on maintaining the neighborhood’s character.. Elaine Almquist. president of the Davis Square Neighborhood Council. said some residents focus on height above all else. describing concerns that nothing should rise beyond about four stories.
The renewed design release reflects a common moment in American city planning: when a developer is willing to adjust form. but residents are asking for something closer to a ceiling on scale.. In practical terms. the difference between a proposal that is “slightly shorter” and one that meets a strict local limit can be felt street by street—at the sidewalk. at storefront entrances. and in how shadows and sightlines change across the day.
It also raises a question Misryoum expects to follow the project through subsequent public review: will the conversation shift from arguing about height alone to evaluating whether the revised podium and pedestrian improvements are enough to rebuild trust?. Copper Mill’s latest emphasis on masonry. brick. and retail activation suggests the developer is trying to make the project legible to neighbors—less like a distant skyline object and more like an integrated part of the district.
For the broader community, the stakes go beyond aesthetics.. Davis Square is one of the Somerville area’s key commercial and transit hubs. and disputes like this often become proxies for larger struggles over housing supply. affordability. and the pace of change in dense neighborhoods.. If the process continues. the next public discussions may reveal whether compromise on design can coexist with demands on height—or whether the project’s feasibility will keep running into the same lines of disagreement.
The updated proposals give the city a fresh set of drawings to consider. but they also make clear that the developer’s core strategy—producing housing at meaningful density—remains intact.. For residents who want a thinner footprint, the difference may feel incremental.. For those who see development as a necessity. the changes could be a step toward making a larger project more workable at the street level.