Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Conversion topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Malden planning board approves permit to convert 27 Sheridan Street from three‑family to two‑family with conditions
Summary
The Malden Planning Board granted a special permit to allow demolition of a structurally unsafe three‑family dwelling at 27 Sheridan Street and construction of a two‑family home, subject to six conditions including limits on basement residential use, bedroom count and landscaping requirements.
Get email alerts on the Residential Conversion topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Malden Planning Board on June 11 approved a special permit to demolish the existing three‑family building at 27 Sheridan Street and rebuild a two‑family dwelling, the board said after a public hearing and staff recommendation.
The petition was presented by Paul Mokie of Vision Design and Construction and owner John Mancini. Mokie told the board the building is “really structurally unsound,” that the owners traced occupancy back to 1891, and that they plan to “take it down by hand” to protect the aging foundation while a structural engineer oversees repairs. Michelle, planning staff, reviewed zoning and staff recommendations, and the building commissioner, Miller, described how the department assigns bedrooms on a certificate of occupancy.
The petition matters because the property is in the Residence A zoning district where the existing three‑family use is preexisting nonconforming and the proposed two‑family conversion requires a special permit under the city code. The board’s approval decreases several dimensional nonconformities and imposes conditions intended to limit new neighborhood impacts.
Board members questioned foundation stability, parking, basement use and window locations. Mokie said the petitioner will shore or replace failing foundation sections per engineering details and keep the street‑facing foundation appearance. He described a roughly 600‑square‑foot basement common area intended for storage and maintenance equipment, not living space, and said the two proposed triple‑tandem parking aisles would accommodate up to six cars on the narrow 18.65‑foot frontage lot. On whether a labeled “home office” could become a bedroom, Mokie said they would avoid closets and not install required hardwired smoke detectors inside those rooms; Building Commissioner Miller told the board that “our department does have a policy where when we issue a ... certificate of occupancy for any building, that certificate contains the number of bedrooms per unit and the location of the bedrooms inside the unit.”
Planning staff recommended approval subject to six conditions: build substantially as shown on the approved plans; limit the dwelling to six bedrooms total; do not enclose the front or rear porches/decks; basement may be used for storage and utilities and “no residential living use by the 2‑family is allowed;” install and maintain landscaped yard areas (per pending landscaping rules) with paving limited to shown driveway/parking; and windows on the southern side may be eliminated while windows on the front facade may be relocated or added as necessary to meet code and character concerns. The staff memo noted the demolition review was completed by the Malden Historical Commission and the commission approved demolition without delay (decision dated 04/24/2025).
After discussion, Planning Board member Diane Chuha moved to grant the special permit with the six staff recommendations; Eric Henry seconded. The motion passed on a roll call vote; the chair announced, “The petition has been granted with conditions.”
Petitioners told the board they plan hand demolition, to shore and repair the foundation with a mason and structural engineer on site, stage materials primarily at the front of the property and place a dumpster near the street. Mokie estimated framing would take a couple of months after the foundation work and said the team is “hoping, like, around October or so to have all our finals and hopefully the occupancy permit.”
The board’s approval does not remove the need for building permits, inspections or any required engineering approvals; staff noted accessory dwelling unit rules and state/local codes could affect future proposals beyond the two‑family use authorized by this special permit.

