OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Summerville Council & SRA Joint Meeting Summary (Nov 7, 2025)

Meeting Portal — Friday, November 7, 2025
BodySomerville, Massachusetts
SessionMeeting Portal
DateFriday, November 7, 2025
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 1:25:12

Transcript — Verbatim
0:02

I wouldn't guess that we some of us would have received that, SRA members.

0:07

I do want to point out I think we might have sent this meeting live, so it might be being recorded right now.

0:12

Okay.

1:15

Councilor Wilson.

1:17

Present.

1:18

There we go.

1:20

All right.

1:20

This is a joint meeting with the Summerville Redevelopment Authority.

1:24

This committee will stand in adjournment or in recess, uh, so they can conduct their business.

1:29

We're in recess.

1:38

Councilor Davis.

1:40

Yes.

2:18

My name is Phil Eric Lini.

2:20

I'm chair of the Summable Redevelopment Library, and I call this meeting to order at seward to chapter two of the acts of twenty twenty-three.

2:31

This public meeting of the SRE is being conducted by a remote participation as well.

2:36

This session will be recorded, will be a public record.

2:39

I will now ask the board members to confirm they are in attendance and in alphabetical order.

2:44

Courtney Brunson.

2:48

Here.

2:48

William Gage.

4:36

I have the same problem.

5:41

These are all related to 90 Washington Street.

5:44

After that, uh, we're gonna have a presentation from the city about these items.

5:47

We'll have questions, public hearing, uh, and then we'll move on to other items.

5:52

Any uh questions or comments?

5:54

Uh please read items four, five, six, five, six, seven, and eight, please.

6:00

Item number five, mayor's request ID number twenty-five-1594.

6:04

Requesting approval of the amended 90 Washington Street Demonstration Project Plan.

6:09

Item number six, ID number 25-1595, requesting approval of an amendment to the memorandum of agreement between the city council and redevelopment authority regarding the redevelopment of 90 Washington Street.

6:22

Item number seven, ID number 25-1596, requesting approval of the development objectives for the redevelopment of 90 Washington Street.

6:31

Item number eight, ID number 25-1607.

6:35

Executive director of the Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development, conveying a summary of the 90 Washington Process Review and Development Objectives.

6:44

All right, thank you.

6:45

So I'm gonna turn it over to the city for a brief presentation about these items.

6:51

Thank you, Mr.

6:51

Chair.

6:52

Just give me one second to share screen.

6:54

And I just want to reiterate thank you, everyone, for the patience this evening with logistics.

7:44

Okay.

7:46

I think we're in place.

7:49

Um hello everyone.

7:51

Through you, Mr.

7:52

Chair to the committee and to the redevelopment authority.

7:55

My name is Ben Demers.

7:56

I'm a senior planner with the economic development team within the Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development.

8:01

Uh and in this capacity, I also serve as the staff support in liaison to the Somerville Redevelopment Authority.

8:06

Um we're here this evening to discuss changes we are recommending to the 90 Washington Street demonstration project plan, uh, mostly to formally remove the public safety building component of the project, and then to do a few other cleanup items.

8:17

This change in the project direction has already been stated publicly by the administration in January.

8:21

We want to make sure that the guiding documents also reflect this change.

8:24

Um we also want to make sure that people have a chance to weigh in on these changes, and given that a public hearing between the city council and the redevelopment authority, or the SRA, as I'll refer to it this evening, was held when the plan was created.

8:34

We want to make sure that this step was mirrored in any amendment.

8:37

Uh for anyone tuning in with less context on the project, I also want to mention so the city council and the SRA are the two parties that adopted the 90 Washington Street demonstration project plan back in 2019.

8:46

Uh so they're also the parties that would need to agree to any amendment.

8:53

Okay.

8:53

Uh so to walk through the agenda quickly.

8:55

I'm gonna start by reviewing some project background for anyone tuning in just to explain uh what led to this amendment.

9:01

And then I'll walk through the actual amendments that we are proposing to the 90 Washington Street demonstration project plan, which would also be reflected in changes to a memorandum of agreement, uh which was then entered into concurrently with the demonstration project plan back in 2019, again between the um between the city council and the redevelopment authority.

9:17

And then last, I'm gonna talk about next steps in this process uh that these changes are gonna tee us up for.

9:22

So this is uh releasing an RFP to select a development partner, and I'm gonna talk about some of the work that we've been doing uh to really get there around um articulating the development priorities more specifically.

9:33

Um the procedural focus of the first part of the presentation that was really on the demonstration project plan.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Zoning Regulations█████████████████████████████████████████████54%
Public Engagement██████████████17%
Economic Development███████████13%
Procedural█████6%
Affordable Housing███4%
Community Engagement███3%
Fiscal Sustainability███3%
Summary of Proceedings

Summerville City Council & SRA Joint Meeting

This joint meeting of the Somerville City Council and the Somerville Redevelopment Authority (SRA) convened at 1:00 PM on November 7, 2025, to discuss amendments regarding the 90 Washington Street project, various zoning ordinance amendments, and strategic upzoning scenarios for Gilman Square. The session included presentations from staff, public testimony, and deliberation on the removal of a public safety building component from the 90 Washington Street plan and potential density increases near transit corridors.

Consent Calendar

  • No specific consent calendar items were formally listed; routine procedural motions were handled during the meeting flow.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Adam Dash (Attorney, representing Altitude Properties LLC): Expressed support for the zoning map amendment at 363 Highland Avenue, noting that required pre-submittal meetings are often unnecessary for experienced developers and drag out project timelines. He stated the project is currently non-viable under MR4 zoning and praised the potential for significant housing production.
  • Peter Kim Santos (Treasurer, Davis Square Neighborhood Council): Expressed full support for the Highland Avenue zoning change and the associated upzoning of the blighted NSTAR property. He welcomed the opportunity for 40 to 50 inclusionary units and the potential for city subsidization discussions.
  • Scott Nochowski (Resident): Expressed support for both aspects of the zoning change, specifically highlighting the need for density near the Davis Square Station and the benefit of incentivizing redevelopment of the unused NSTAR parcel.
  • Yasmin Rodassi (Legislative Liaison, Mayor's Office): Communicated the administration's concerns regarding displacement risks associated with upzoning and emphasized the need for comprehensive public engagement beyond neighborhood councils to protect current residents.

Discussion Items

  • 90 Washington Street Demonstration Project Plan Amendments:

    • Staff presented recommendations to formally remove the "public safety complex" (fire, police, 911) from the project objectives, which was originally intended for this site.
    • Proposed new objectives include recouping funds spent on the eminent domain judgment (approx. $39 million total) and refining the developer selection process to align with current city standards.
    • Staff proposed replacing the Technical Advisory Committee with the Civic Advisory Committee (standard for SRA projects) and changing the developer timeline requirement from "breaking ground" within three years to "applying for permits" to allow for more flexible negotiations.
    • Council Member Wilson: Expressed a preference for concentrating the required green space near the adjacent Cobble Hill apartments and noted the desire to orient density away from that sensitive area.
    • Council Member Ewan Campbell: Requested clarification on the timeline for the RFP process and noted his intention to attend a future Land Use Committee meeting.

  • Zoning Ordinances Amendments (Item 2.1):

    • Discussion on making pre-submittal meetings optional for special permits, site plan approvals, and variances to expedite processes for experienced firms. Statistics cited indicated 64% of 2025 meetings involved experienced professionals (e.g., architects, law firms, contractors).
    • Staff clarified that required meetings remain for subdivision plans and master plan special permits. Legislative liaison noted the amendment is largely for administrative cleanup and consistency.

  • Home-Based Child Daycare Amendment (Item 2.2):

    • Discussion on amending the zoning ordinance to permit home-based child daycares in all residential districts in compliance with new state law (MGL c. 40A). Staff also included corrections to various use tables.

  • Zoning Map Amendment (Item 2.3 - 363 Highland Ave):

    • Request to change zoning from MR4 to a combination of MR5 and MR6 for 363 Highland Avenue and the adjacent NSTAR property.
    • Council Member Wilson: Asked if the City would consider subsidization to increase the affordable unit percentage beyond the standard 20% inclusionary requirement. Representative Dash agreed it was an open topic for discussion.
    • Council Member Campbell: Expressed curiosity about the specific number of affordable units (estimated at 50, or 20% of ~250 total units) and confirmed the project scope does not currently include city subsidies but is open to discussion.
    • Council Member Davis recused herself due to residing across the street.

  • Gilman Square Upzoning Scenarios (Item 3):

    • Staff presented four conceptual scenarios for upzoning in Gilman Square to increase housing production around transit, ranging from mid-rise (MR6) expansion to extended Urban Residential (UR) zones.
    • Council Member Davis: Noted that upzoning intentionally increases development pressure, viewing it as a feature rather than a bug, while emphasizing the need for robust public engagement to address displacement concerns raised by the Mayor's office.
    • Council Member Wilson: Supported upzoning near transit due to the lower risk of displacing existing affordable housing in those specific locations and the potential for high-density affordable units.
    • Council Member Young Campbell: Requested future analysis on the impact of upzoning on tax bills for current residents who have not yet developed their properties.
    • Council Member Davis: Advocated for the expansion of the "Small Business District overlay" to all city squares to ensure a variety of commercial spaces and prevent large corporate tenants from dominating pedestrian streets.

Key Outcomes

  • 90 Washington Street: The committee authorized the staff to proceed with the public hearing process for amendments to the Demonstration Project Plan and Memorandum of Agreement. A vote on these amendments by the City Council is anticipated in November or December 2025, with an RFP for a development partner expected in early 2026.
  • Pre-Submittal Meetings (Item 2.1): The item remains in committee after a public hearing; the public comment period is open until November 21, 2025.
  • Child Daycare (Item 2.2): The item remains in committee following a public hearing; the public comment period is open until November 21, 2025.
  • Highland Avenue Map Change (Item 2.3): The item remains in committee following a public hearing; the public comment period is open until November 21, 2025.
  • Gilman Square Scenarios (Item 3): The four upzoning scenarios remain in committee for further dialogue. Staff agreed to provide additional analysis regarding fiscal impacts and potential individual tax bill implications in future sessions, pending confirmation from the Department of Revenue for the Assessor's Office to attend.
  • Adjournment: The joint meeting adjourned at approximately 3:30 PM, with the SRA and Council proceeding to their respective subsequent business or recesses as needed.

Meeting Transcript

I wouldn't guess that we some of us would have received that, SRA members. I do want to point out I think we might have sent this meeting live, so it might be being recorded right now. Okay. Councilor Wilson. Present. There we go. All right. This is a joint meeting with the Summerville Redevelopment Authority. This committee will stand in adjournment or in recess, uh, so they can conduct their business. We're in recess. Councilor Davis. Yes. My name is Phil Eric Lini. I'm chair of the Summable Redevelopment Library, and I call this meeting to order at seward to chapter two of the acts of twenty twenty-three. This public meeting of the SRE is being conducted by a remote participation as well. This session will be recorded, will be a public record. I will now ask the board members to confirm they are in attendance and in alphabetical order. Courtney Brunson. Here. William Gage. I have the same problem. These are all related to 90 Washington Street. After that, uh, we're gonna have a presentation from the city about these items. We'll have questions, public hearing, uh, and then we'll move on to other items. Any uh questions or comments? Uh please read items four, five, six, five, six, seven, and eight, please. Item number five, mayor's request ID number twenty-five-1594. Requesting approval of the amended 90 Washington Street Demonstration Project Plan. Item number six, ID number 25-1595, requesting approval of an amendment to the memorandum of agreement between the city council and redevelopment authority regarding the redevelopment of 90 Washington Street. Item number seven, ID number 25-1596, requesting approval of the development objectives for the redevelopment of 90 Washington Street. Item number eight, ID number 25-1607. Executive director of the Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development, conveying a summary of the 90 Washington Process Review and Development Objectives. All right, thank you. So I'm gonna turn it over to the city for a brief presentation about these items. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just give me one second to share screen. And I just want to reiterate thank you, everyone, for the patience this evening with logistics. Okay. I think we're in place. Um hello everyone. Through you, Mr. Chair to the committee and to the redevelopment authority. My name is Ben Demers. I'm a senior planner with the economic development team within the Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development. Uh and in this capacity, I also serve as the staff support in liaison to the Somerville Redevelopment Authority. Um we're here this evening to discuss changes we are recommending to the 90 Washington Street demonstration project plan, uh, mostly to formally remove the public safety building component of the project, and then to do a few other cleanup items. This change in the project direction has already been stated publicly by the administration in January. We want to make sure that the guiding documents also reflect this change. Um we also want to make sure that people have a chance to weigh in on these changes, and given that a public hearing between the city council and the redevelopment authority, or the SRA, as I'll refer to it this evening, was held when the plan was created.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com