And we should be recording and folks are now in the meeting. Uh so Linda please. >> Great. Good evening everyone. It's great to see people in person in November. We could not see you. appreciate all of the work that's gone
into making this meeting a little bit more visible and audible. Um, but we'd like to welcome you all to the December 2nd, 2025 meeting of the Boston Civic Design Commission. The open meeting law requires that we notify the public that a recording of this meeting is being
made by the commission staff and we'd like to call the meeting to order. My name is Linda Eastley, co-chair of the BCDC. Big thank you to the commissioners that went out in the rain and are joining virtually tonight for their professional
guidance that helps to shape our city of Boston into a more beautiful, sustainable, and equitable place for all its citizens. Tonight, we have a fairly compact agenda. We're reviewing two projects for
recommendation, and we'd like to begin with a roll call. And commissioners, you can say present as I call your name. I don't see Diana today. Seth, is that right? Okay. >> Correct. >> Jonathan Garland,
>> present. >> Shauna Gilly Smith, >> David Hassin, >> present. >> Mick Young Kim, >> present. >> Kathy Karitus, >> present. Anmarie Lubenau
>> present. >> David Manf Freddy >> I don't see Katherine joining us just yet. David Nagahiro >> present. >> Laura Solano >> present. >> Kirk Sykes >> present.
>> And myself Linda Eastley present. Thank you commissioners. Uh we are put still putting together the meeting minutes for the November 5th full committee meeting and also the November 18th design subcommittee. So
we'll distribute those later and do a vote at that time. So we will um move on to our next agenda. We don't actually have a report from review committee because we don't have any new projects to review tonight.
Christina circulated a first pass at hybrid meeting participation guidelines that you all should have received, all the commissioners should have received in your inbox today. We are going to ask that each of you review that document and then get any comments back to
Christina and Seth over the next couple of weeks. Mimi and I also will be reviewing the document together and we'll submit our comments as well. And once we get them all, uh, Seth and Christina will update that document and then we'll review that draft as an
agenda item in a future BCDC meeting. But at a very high level today, one of the pieces in those guidelines was just about um projecting your voice if you're in person, which we can already tell
from um the short minutes we've been in this meeting that the microphones are working a lot better than they were in November. So, thank you. But if those that are in person could still project your voice, that would be great. And um Seth, anything else you wanted to add
about that participation guide? >> Yes. I would ask uh for folks in the room uh who would like to speak either as public comment or response to question, if you could come up to the table so that you're closer to the mic. Uh it's hard the words get gargled when
folks are speaking from far away. Um, also if anybody is having any issues hearing anybody while they're speaking, please put a note in the chat, uh, or any other logistical issues, please use the chat to alert us so that we can try to address it and ask people to repeat
if something wasn't clear. Um, please do not use the chat for any sort of substantive uh, feedback. Uh, it's meant to be for logistic purposes only at this time. Uh, we hope to address that in the future. Maybe use that. >> Thank you, Seth. How is the audio for
those of you there in person? Are you able to hear those of us joining remotely? >> Okay, >> pretty good. I got >> great. Yeah, it's a lot better this month. I'm really thrilled about that. So, thank you, Seth, and you and Christina for um working on a couple of
the logistical problems we had last time. >> All right, we >> and Lizzy >> and Lizzy. Thank you, Lizzy. So, we're going to uh start our presentation tonight with 434 Jamaica Way in Jamaica Plane, which is back in
front of us. This is this proponents team third presentation to BCDC. Kirk, I believe you are recused from this project. So, we'll ask you to turn off your audio and video if you wouldn't mind. The commissioners that were at our last
subcommittee were commissioners Garland, Hassin, Love, Lubenau, Nagahiro, and Solano. So, we will invite you to offer comments first following the presentation. And I think we are ready for the Roger Dilla
Schaefer team to begin. And I think you have 15 minutes. And then we'll follow that with some um Q&A from commissioners. And for the Roger team joining virtually, I believe someone is going to be sharing their screen.
Uh, and also just want to make a note that although that intro slide did say 10 minutes, we are doing 15 minutes for test driving, 15 minutes for presentations, uh, add introductions and bulk and final recommendation as these
are now becoming more substantive meetings. um you know with our with our road maps. Um so I think that's it and other than the wrong date on the cover which uh we forgot to mention to you all um we'll turn it over to the Roger team.
>> Thank you Jeremy Vieira real estate development director at communities. Um I want to hand it over to Walter Ramos our CEO. He's available. Walter I know you wanted to say a couple words. Not seeing Walter. All righty. Well, in
that case, bunch of communities for those who don't know is a nonprofit based out of uh Rosundell uh working with seniors and uh and doing predominant memory care, affordable housing. Um so this is a project near and dear to our heart and um it's a
conversion or a redevelopment of our main campus uh or one of our main campuses I should say and with that I'll hand it over to Philippe Sad who will be doing our architect Dilla Schaefer who will be doing the bulk of the presentation. Thank you. >> Thank you Jeremy.
Advancing the slides excuse me. Uh so quickly what happened since we last met with your team? Um we have now 41 affordable housing units on site. Previously 71. Uh the memory care unit
remain as they have since the beginning of the proposal and they are replacing one to one what the client has on site. Uh we have increased the the preservation of significant trees per the request of the city as well as the
neighbors. Uh we have 50 parking spaces uh on site. 35 are underground uh and for staff and we have reorganized the site to preserve the 1956 building part of what will be called
phase two. Roger is May I have your attention please? May I have your attention please? We will be conducting a test with the fire alarm audio visual system beginning at 6 p.m. this evening.
Please disregard any fire alarm audio visual signals unless notified otherwise. >> Wow. >> Obviously. >> Okay. Those are unplanned and then we unfortunately do not we're not told when
they are. Um Christine, please continue. >> Excuse me. So Roger House is what everybody knows from Jamaica Way. However, their site is significantly larger and it sits predominantly on Bford Road and where the main access is.
Previously when we sat with the commission we showed the sevenstory building and we had a good amount of comments from the commission about reducing the size and the scale reducing the many materials the masonry on three floors as well as the different
cementicious materials on the upper level of the building as well as maintaining trees and I if I recall people said we this street is quiet let's design a building that fits quietly on the street so designing.
So that's that's the massing that was presented previously. So we're coming back to you all today with a a phase one that is predominantly four floors at is appears on Buffford Road. There is a twotory that recedes behind that are six
floors to really uh complete the density required by the program. We also have a phase two which is highlighted um at four floors and three floors that sits behind the red brick uh legacy building
called Roger House. The massing has been transformed also to maintain a lot of the trees in that corner which happen to be the majority of the mature trees and we have eliminated a a service drive that previously was located between our
building and the Forbes building and it's been now relocated in the circle in a very similar fashion as uh it was it is currently operating. Before we start on the building, I wanted to put forward few of the concept
of what makes because there's a memory care on site. There's a lot of directions that our team had to accommodate and take and mostly are about sight as well as buildings. But these are some of the elements that we followed to really provide a dementia
positive space for those residents, the 66 units who live on the first three floors of that building. And these are some of the guidelines of exterior and outdoor space uh that uh we have abided by or followed or highlighted in our
project moving forward. So we're starting with the site because the site and the outdoor space in the city for those who have memory impairment is equally important as having a home. Uh in in the red dash is the previous outline of the building as
we presented it to you. So you can immediately see how we have freed up the top right corner of the site to maintain a lot of trees, but we've used this space as one of three outdoor memory spaces for the residents. This is more of the quiet side. This is more of an
active terrace for also memory care residents and a fully secure internal courtyard uh within the donut shaped building. The third courtyard that manifest between phase one and phase two
is a open outdoor space for the residents of the building as well as the neighborhood. Is literally a continuation of what is in the front which is the front lawn along Jamaica Way with the open space and the sidewalk that meander through the site and end on
uh center street. We've since last meeting with the subcommittee, we have also done some changes to the site plan. There were comments about adjusting the benches along the street so they do not face the neighbors. So now they have turned 90 degrees and they face each other to
encourage conversation among neighbors and people. And we are working on demarcating this the entrance of that site because this is now the main front door for the new Roger house through some signage uh
located at the entryway of of the campus. That's it. It's sectioned through the front um the sidewalk, the 8-ft sidewalk as well as a 4 foot permeable and then the planted area towards the inner part
of of the outdoor space that is manifested and represented in this area and the benches being turned 90°. Uh as I explained before, um this is a section through the sites specifically taken here. um memory care needs secure
outdoor spaces, but we've worked with topography and landscape elements to really um not use fences and barriers, but use landscape elements to create security. And here we've used the topography as well as a pergola or a
shaded structure that is really the the barrier between the public and the memory care side. a series of stepped um sensory garden and a prominade that will allow the residents to really discover
the landscape as they meander securely through that space through a greenhouse and then end up in a more contemplative garden towards the back. That's a plan of the more public lawn which will be furnished with um outdoor
seating areas as well as many uh other uh green spaces that would welcome the public as well as the residents of the affordable housing that will be occupying level four, five and six of the building. So when we >> time warning,
>> excuse me, >> time warning time letter. >> Thank you. So when we design a four-story building, we really design it very differently. So we looked immediately at the context and we also looked at the context of Boston in terms of elements of what makes Boston uh what
it is. The archways, the bay window, the undulation of the facades that really um occ um front many of our streets. And this is really reflected in the Bowford Street condominium across the street from from the site and the regularity of
the buildings and the fenestration is really something also that manifest itself on site at the Roger High House. So our our strategy has been in two parts. What phase one is composed of masonry along the street with a
secondary material behind that is more cementitious as well as phase two follow the same logic uh as it fronts the street. We have used some of the historic strategies to articulate the facade of the building in a similar way by highlighting the first
floor through a series of arches, creating vertical bras to to mod to to break the long facade, but also introducing an undulating brick facade to scalloped to reflect on the bay windows of the historic Boston and the
back in a in a receding material in a more subdued material uh color. This is the facade of the front along Bowford Street that will appear as four stories. And as we look at a section across the site, you see the Bowford condominium on
the left hand side, the fourstory building on in the middle and then the six-story building receding in the back in the cementitious material. When we met with the commission, they have asked us to look and revise few things. create more definition to the archways on the
first floor. Uh clarify the the breaks along the building, simplify the crown at the top of the masonry scalloped and really rethink or or connect better the the six-story building with a four-story building.
So that's what we presented to the commission the subcommittee previously and we have studied it in a darker material introducing the similar wood that becomes one of the an interstitial connective tissue between the front and the back. We actually went a little bit
further and studied it in a more variegated way but we do prefer the more subtle and darker way where the windows and the wood is more highlighted. This is a rendering that we presented to the subcommittee uh previously from the street and that's the new renderings
where the crown has been removed and the wood interstitial material has been introduced in also in a more consistent way in the front in the front of the building. A little bit more closeup previous with more updated. It has simplified that aesthetics and made the
flutes more elongated. windows have been set back to to to create more shadow lines but also to receive that wooden material that is a continuous secondary material throughout the facade.
Uh subcommissioner also have asked us to look at the brick patterns at the top of the arches and we've we've run through some of the iterations and our pref preferred one is the one on the left hand side. It creates a little bit more of a that contemporary but still very
textural um material uh at top of the archway. Um a close-up view of the of the top of the building highlighting the undulation and the windows as we talked about and to the commissioner that has asked to
clarify what the brakes would be. The bricks would be windows. Behind them there's residence. But then there's that same wooden material that will be introduced as well in a in a similar consistent way throughout facades. That's a view from the Jamaica way of
the phase 2 next to the the legacy building. And the last is this small animation. And with this I thank you for your attention. Great. >> Thank you, Phipe. >> Thank you. >> Appreciate the presentation.
So, commissioners, um Jonathan, David Hine, Ann Marie, David Nagahiro, and Laura Salano um are all the ones that were at the last subcommittee and also are here tonight. So,
we will give you the floor. Um, I think what we'd like to do is if you're in person, if you could raise your physical hand, that will help us to see who'd like to make the comment and we'll raise digital hands on screen and see how that
serves us today and we can make adjustments as we go forward. And Linda, I'm not sure if you can still see uh the screen in the room here, but I see David Hassin and Kathy go to us.
>> Great. David, do you want to go first? >> Um yeah, I'm I just want to um happily summarize the the the conversation that we had in subcommittee. I think in general um the uh the the BCDC was very
pleased with the uh overall change in massing and the strategy for the site finding it to be a more harmonious neighbor in the neighborhood in the community. Um, I think that Phipe um accurately
uh summarized the relatively minor um architectural issues that were brought up um at the time and uh in my mind has um very uh successfully um uh addressed
them and I I very I personally very much like those changes that you've made with the color um the simplification of top and you know clarifying some of those other elements including the benches too which I know is old landscape issue but
um I think our uh we were uh not to to take too much time I think we were very enthusiastic about the project and uh we're excited to have it come back um for uh to the full commission for a vote.
>> Thank you. David, >> that's it. Kathy, did you have your hand up as well? >> I did. Um, and I will echo much of what David just said because I think the overall um adjustments to the project
respond better to the context and especially to the Bowfort Street um existing brick facad. This is almost a um a a complement really to the the bow front of that that street in a way that
I think is it's going to be um quite lovely actually. Um but I really respect the scaling down um of of the project and I understand what that means for you. Um and and I also like that you've
chosen brick um and the arcuated system all the way um down the the stretch of this edge because I think it's that too is a nice response to the building across the way. But it just in your dusk shots it it suggests a lot more light on
the street and uh and on the sidewalk and into the seating areas which um is great. So and this is the first time I'm seeing it in quite some time. So I really really appreciate all the adjustments made. I have one question that may be answered um along the way
and that is when phase two is the anticipated and um and if we are approving a general framework here or if that's later on >> believe I can take that. So
>> yeah I can take that. Um, so phase two right now we're really just expressing what it could look like and we wanted to get let the commission understand the sense of scale and what we're proposing that would be coming along at a later date pending financing of the phase one
and and how that all works out. It's it's likely two to three years in the future. >> Great. But for the record, the 1950s building is correct. >> Preserved is preserved >> and and we'll forward >> we think is a really important part of uh of the facade on on the Jamaica way
and and we're really glad that we have to integrate it the way we did. >> Beautiful. >> And just a point of clarification on process. So yes, just phase one has been formally submitted to the city for review. Um because of the importance of the overall site, uh we worked closely
with the proponent to make sure we had a sense of let's call it the master plan for the site and what what to expect when phase 2 is actually filed in a few years. And as part of that, they've made the commitment to keep the legacy building in the scale that they have currently proposed. Um the final details
of that to be worked out when that actually gets submitted. >> Thanks for the question, Kathy. Um and Marie, >> uh I too uh was very happy to see the reduction in height, the changes in the
massian scale. Could you um go to a site plan, please? Uh I'm also uh support the change in brick. Uh I have some concerns about um just the c. I'm actually
excited to see the the detailing of the brick. I'm a little concerned about the cost of that. Um I will leave that to uh future discussions or negotiations on the site plan. At the last meeting, I raised a concern about the tightness of
the entry that one of the moves you're making is positioning the main entrance um at the at the corner at the you know end of Bow for Road. Um I understand that there are constraints. I understand that. You know, one thing I would
encourage you to explore as you continue to refine the design is how you can demarcate this as an entrance to the site. You know, this is a residential street. People will be coming in and out. you know, are there ways that you
can introduce something um as part of the building at that corner or on the site that signals that this is an entrance to a really a campus, a campus entrance. And I'd also um and I know that fitting the number of housing units
in is going to be really key, but you know, as I looked at the plan again and and thought about my comment at the last meeting, you know, my instinct is can you take that western edge of the building facing Bowfort and pull it back
so that it aligns, you know, with the building across the street just to open it up. So as you enter it, you you can actually see more of the campus um as you turn into the site. So that that's um what I would encourage you to
explore. And it's not as I recall that that piece of the building is a one-story building. Correct. >> It's a there is a small portion there is a small portion here that is a one story. The rest is three stories. I think the line of one story somewhere
around there. >> Yes. >> Okay. I I would I don't my instinct is to to pull that back and open it up. Um again, I will I will leave it. I I know there's a lot of uh detail consideration that go into the design, but it just
feels very tight to me. And given the investment that's being made on that campus, I think really thinking about how you create a strong entrance to the to the campus as a whole will be really critical. Thank you.
Thanks, Anmirie. Lara Solano, I see your hand up. >> Yes, thank you and thank you for the presentation. Um, I have one major um comment which is um it's crystal clear
what's happening with the master plan in the long term. Um, but I'd love to go to a phase one diagram. Um, because I'm concerned that there's really been not much discussion on what the landscape is
going to look like between phase one and phase two. So, could we go to that? Could we go to um that plan? >> We had a phasing diagram that we moved >> it somewhere. All right.
>> Perfect. Thank you. >> Existing phase one intermediate. >> It's that intermediate. Well, it's really the I I'll stick with the intermediate. So So what what happens in
that space and I'm I'm actually not asking you to give me a a full answer, but I know that there are topographic changes there. And so what is the vision for that open space and how long would
it be that open space before phase two comes along >> the the phase the whole campus. Jeremy do you want me to answer or you want to take this? >> If you want to if you want to speak to the you know architecture and then I can
speak to the timing. We know it cannot stay like this for the memory care residents because people who are on that side have a door and have a patio and need to get out there. Uh the discussion with the client since the
beginning has been that this um intended to happen one after the other. So after phase one is done and people are moved there's a construction site happening in the majority of that open space so that phase two happen. there will be some
temporary barriers to provide security for the residents who are living in the memory care until phase two is built. Now phase two is also affordable housing. So it all depend on the funding streams. So there this intermediate time
um could not be very precisely defined. >> Has has the um the just let me ask one question. So, has the planning staff um
worked with that interim area? And I ask because um as you mentioned, the housing in phase two really is up to the financing etc. And so I'm just concerned about what happens with that space. Has
there been discussion about that? And I I guess um I'll ask that of the planning staff. >> We have So Megan returns the senior urban designer on the project. >> Sorry, Megan. >> Megan, can you get a little closer to a mic for us? Thank you.
>> Um, so Megan Richards, the senior urban designer working on the project. We have not had extensive discussions about what happened. Our understanding was the intention is to demol they once the units they need to keep the existing memory care. So the existing addition
they need to keep that in place until the phase one building is complete. The residents who are currently there will move into the phase one building and then I think the idea is that they will demolish. I do think the question is when do you demolish that given the
funding sources and concerns about a phase 2 and I think that's a conversation we we have not had extensive discussions about. >> Correct. Yeah. And I'll add a little bit to that if that's all right. So the way I envision it and again there are going to be you know uh timing uh
considerations. My goal is to our goal as Roger is to time it so that the moment the uh other building comes down we can be demolish the uh we can begin work I should say on the new building. That takes a lot of timing and
coordination. That's my job to make sure that that happens as tightly on a schedule as possible. um the in the intim period I can give you one idea one thought and something we're going to execute on uh regardless of the funding
timing of phase two you'll see that upper uh upper right corner um that contemplative garden and the courtyard would both be available to residents in the interim period. So that certainly will become part of the inrim. It's not
as elaborate as what will eventually come, but our intention is to to create those two spaces in an interim period, whether it be for, you know, probably about 18 months um while we're constructing the the other portion.
>> Will the let's call it the front yard on Jamaica Way still be available? >> Yes. So that will not be touched the the front portion. >> Sorry. So, I I would just ask that um the planning staff um continue to keep
this discussion open as to um maybe go over some scenarios of what happens if it's open for a year or what happens if it's open for a different length of time. um because I know in
memory care, you know, finding um peace is really important and having some place to to really go outdoors. So, I applaud you for doing that. Um Northeast Corner, I think that will be extremely helpful and it's great to get that
online and as a cherished space. But just look a little further on that. Um I think Sorry to interrupt, Laura. We may have an additional staff response. >> Yeah. Uh, this is Carl Hmay, staff architect with Mayor's Office of
Housing. Um, I've been working with the group and and Megan on the project so far. I was just going to say that it it seems maybe likely that your longer interim condition would be where phase one is complete and they have not done
any demolition work. So that while that phase two is being you know gathering the the necessary financing and uh logistical components you would pro maybe have a longer duration where all of the buildings occupy the site at at
one time and you have the that that condition essentially is probably what I would imagine the longest interim phase to be >> going to interfere here. Our our building is set to a minimum from the existing building. We have maximized
the site of phase one. The 15 ft plus or minus between the new and the old is not sustainable for somebody to live with. No wind there the windows. So that building has to come down. >> Yep. Y
>> for for to be able to sell these units or rent these units. So this condition is only a very small temporary condition while people are moving to the new building. Jeremy uh >> yeah so to to that's a very good point
Philly. Thank you. So the the intent for is to really move folks in uh over about a 3 to four month period and then immediately uh demolish the the existing building. Uh with the exception of light obviously the uh the rest will come
down. Um and that is to now that will be along for a period of time or a construction site depending on how the time it works. Uh but that that is the intent both for the the units that are along that edge and just for the overall
u uh appeal of the the property. I think similar to how we've been working on other projects where we will work with you on what those interimm conditions are and the concern about accessibility like because there is significant grade
change on the site. We'll want to understand what that interimm condition from a landscape perspective >> and we'll definitely do an iteration of what the what one of the interim looks like on a site side as we get into design development. And this is also something that we as a
planning department can work with the proponent and memorialize in the board memo um to set minimum expectations for each sort of phase. >> Um I' I'd like to ask a question about the facade of the building um on the
east side. Um I I didn't notice in the um side elevations that there was much grade change and I thought that there was a fairly significant amount of grade change between Buford and the um the the
low point on the site to the back. Um is is that right or did I misunderstand the grading there? You had a Oh, there you go. You had some uh full side elevations of >> Yes. Had
>> you were looking at this? >> No, the um north is up sort of right. So is on the east side um next to the alley that is no longer being used for service. >> This guy.
>> Yeah. Is there a fair amount of grade change there or >> is there is six and a half to seven feet grade change difference between the the the low the the right hand side and the main and the street side
>> is that reflected in the building? >> Yes, it is the building. Yeah, it's you can see here this is the buffer road level >> and then there is a drop here and this contemplative garden is 6 to 7 ft lower
than the floor of the memory care garden. That's why we have that meandering path that goes around and ends in that circle culde-sac. >> Yep. I I understand that. Um, I just wanted to ask when that drop is made, is
that made with a wall and then straight out to the U memory garden or and if so, are there windows on the bottom of that wing? The the um threetory wing
>> four garage the garage is half floor below grade. >> Okay. So that's what's that's what is >> um taking up space. >> Yes. >> Okay, great. I didn't understand that. And then um my only last um comment is
I'm going to underline underline Ann Marie's comment about the front and the entry. Um I'm not confident that that's quite worked out and I think it is a matter of looking at architecture and site together. It's a very awkward
corner and I know you're dealing with a lot there, but it's it's tricky and I would encourage um planning to continue to look at how that might um both be inviting into the site and more obvious
that that is actually a a significant entry. A >> quick respond to this to you Marie. We took a big chunk out of the building here in the back and we've relocated a lot of the a the programs. The program
is very tight for that first floor. We'll see what we can do. I understand the intent. Uh >> yeah, it's sort of all the it feels like the leftover pieces coming together. Um and so
you you've set the standard too high. You made such a leap with the before that we can now put our finger on those kinds of things. Um but but uh you've proven your creativity so I would hope you could continue to develop that.
Thank you. >> Thank you, Laura. I appreciate it. Commissioners, I don't see any additional hands. Oh, David Man. >> Now I do. Now I do. David, do you wanna go first and then Jonathan?
>> Well, I think I think Jonathan Jonathan first and then me and then David. >> So So one one recommendation, Seth, that I would make is that the camera should be on the long wall so we can see all the commissioners at a uniform size
because I can see Jonathan and David Man Freddy really well and then not a lot of people behind that. So I apologize if I've missed hands. >> It's all right. you're doing a good job. Um, so Phipe and team, I would applaud you again for similar to the
subcommittee, I think the project has really come a long way. Uh, from the previous rendition, the sevenstory building. Um, and I think like uh Laura just mentioned, I think we are down to some details, uh, which could be in many ways worked out with staff. if you can
maybe just flip to uh one of your renderings from street streetscape I guess or one of the yes street perspectives um or the one let's see slide 29 maybe um I I love the you know the
craftsmanship the detailing the attention I heard something about creativity I certainly agree with that um to that end I do think there could be a little more simplification um just to because you have a lot of elegant moves here and I think they
sometimes become more elegant almost the simpler they get or where you know really important things stand out and so what I mean by that is there's a number of arches at the base and and I could also see a scenario where um a lot of
those arches could go away those could be more like flat tops and maybe preserve the arch for say an entry condition where you are entering through the arch because then it sort of ties to the meaning or the function. Um, and
that's maybe one way to simplify. Um, I am encouraged by I think last time you had more brick uh checkerboard pattern making at the top which has gone away. I think that's helpful because it helps to accentuate the punch window and brings
more of that detail down to the uh to the pedestrian scale at the base. Um, so again, these are just refinements or studies that I think you could engage in. Um, and then looking at the the lower volume, I think to the right side of
this image, uh, it seems like you've incorporated, if you go to slide 25, maybe you've incorporated some wood with, yeah, punched windows. Uh, I don't so much mind the wood. I just I guess
would be uh I'd be curious to see what would happen if you kept the window regimen fairly regular like you have in the main volume. Again, taking cues from the references you showed across the street with the uh with the bay fronts and just the the simplicity that that
provides. I think you could still appreciate a high quality facade, but maybe just more regular uh pattern. And again, I'm just stating a couple of details that I think you could work with staff. And then lastly, I noticed I think in your cover sheet, the corner
image, you were showing a granite base. Uh, but then that got interrupted by brick. And I wonder if you would consider um or the next shot uh retaining the granite base all the way across the bottom just to kind of create
make sure that there's a durable building. >> Yeah. Yes. The intent is to maintain the granite base. It might not have made it into the last renderings. I apologize. >> But once again, I I appreciate um all of the attention you brought to this. I
think it's a a fantastic project. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Jonathan. You all know at the table who had their hand up next. >> I'll go next. >> Okay. Yeah, we'll just go.
>> Um, I'm gonna I'm gonna um talk about something that Jonathan talked about, but first, I I don't think I've seen this since your original presentation, and it is vastly improved, and uh I hope the neighborhood shares those feelings. There's a lot of concern that opening
night. Uh, I want to compare what you've done here on Bowford, which I think is really very nice. And Jonathan used the word craft. I I think I I respect Jonathan's comments, but sometimes you can you can simplify and make it even
better. But I really appreciate that um you're treating brick uh with with great respect uh and using brick to to create texture. Um, and it does feel like real craft and and to a certain extent in
inventive ways. Now, I want to go to that same elevation Jonathan went to, which I think was page 25. Uh, and I I recognize that we can't have all of this detail, all of the quality of the
brick all the way around the building. I'm not challenging that at all. But I wonder why I'm going to say something a little bit different than Jonathan. Why you feel the need uh for the panels of um I guess what's to look like natural
wood within the horizontal I'll call them clabards. I know they're not really clabards, but there's an integrity to the Bford part of the building, a simplicity. There's a brick frame and then there's masonry openings in the brick frame. I feel on this part of the
building you're making frame you're making picture frames and filling them in with wood and I think you're doing it as we've seen many projects come through BCDC to try to maybe exaggerate the
solid to void ratio maybe um um manipulate the proportions I think it would be so much stronger if you took away the second frame the the frame of the wood and just had the the the window
in that what I think is a very simple elevation of kind of a clabboard. Yeah, we're your we're whoever's got the arrow. The windows are strong. The proportions of the windows are nice. Um the the the
definition of three floors. I I like all of it except what I feel like is a kind of stuck on frame of wood that doesn't mean anything in terms of inside outside. Uh and I would urge you to to
have the same sort of um craft on this part of the building as shown on the other part of the really become a really nice project though. I want to say that >> and follow following up on that. So when
I started the present when we started the presentation today, I thought I've never seen this project before. I haven't been to anything. And then we got to the third slide where it was the previous one and I went, "Oh my god, I never believe it." So it's a tremendous tremendous change. So, so I I really
wanted to echo um my fellow commissioners's um comments and and you know clearly appreciate the responsiveness because it it's it's um developed a lot. Um so I have a couple of of smaller comments. Um
is this when we're talking about the entrance, it's a public camp. Is this going to be a public park open to the public? to park in the in the front part >> is that park in the very front uh bridge so it's it's available for folks to walk in and
>> yeah frolic for a better word um and that courtyard in the center will also be a portion of it I should say will be open to the public and then it does become a barrier there is a barrier there between that and the memory garden behind it. Um, so yeah, as you can see
there. So those are all intended to be open to the to the neighborhood to walk their dog, just take a stroll. Um, I think postco walking has become vastly more important to as well certainly has to me. And um, so keeping those open uh, the front has is with some slight tweaks
and then the court being available is important as well >> which which you know is I completely appreciate and I was hoping going to be the answer. So I when we're talking about that the sort of pressure of that entrance I think there does have to be a
little bit more that signals it not just a community secret. It's nice that it's community secret but I would be walking down the street not have any indication that that was open for me to go into. Um, so I think in in developing and
working with the planning planning department, I think planning department um still can't get that. Um, the the other couple things that that I would note um I I understand the grade change and I understand the sort of importance of of walking. I think um since
particularly since phase 2 hasn't been fully developed, I'd love it if there could be a little bit more space in that. I think right now it's it feels a little bit of a repetitious very very direct there's not enough sort of
lingering places along it. I don't know if there's a direct stare as well. So, I think having both if there isn't a direct stare, I think there should be a direct stare because not everybody's going to want to do all of that and and then I think making it more of an
experience as you're changing grade um I think I think is important to developing that that passage. So, I I think it will need more both more length and more directness in order to create just sort of some spatial differentiation, some places to be sitting along that that
that journey. Um but but I appreciate it as well. And then the other comment that I have if we go to the bow for facade that we've not not page 25 but the um just kind of the money shot facade
um that we looked at a lot. >> This one? >> No, the one with all the planters, the big planters in front >> where So I I appreciate the planting and I also appreciate this the pockets of
seating but I don't feel that the landscape and the architecture are talking to each other very much. The the sort of complexity of the materials and verticality of the building and the you know sort of extreme punctuation and texture and I'm not saying repeating it
but maybe there's a way that it's picking up the bay in some way. Maybe the planter, you know, the material of the planter, which looks like quart steel. I'm not sure what it is. Um, but I think I think some more exploration on what that material is, but also the
modulation of the planter because it it kind of looks like it's just pasted on in front of the building. And I think that there is, you know, that there's been so much um effort in the detailing of and the architecture that that taking that level of thinking to to that the
landscape element and and I'm sure that's all the way through, but this is sort of the place that we really do receive the landscape articulated. I mean, I I Yeah. And a lot of the other landscape was really sort of precedent images and plans and sections. So I just think you
encourage you going through with working with with the planning department to be really thinking about that level of detailing and finish in the landscape as well. >> Yeah, I think there and Philip, not to speak for you, but I know that this planter is one of those places we we
know that there's some refinement uh necessary to do make it interact with the building a little bit better than it does. Um and I think what we wanted to articulate here was very much the benches. That was one very key point. We
want to make sure that people understand we hear that the that thickness of the that planter and how it exactly um interacts with the architecture >> and the height of the walls and you know because Yeah. >> Can I ask for one followup before the alarm goes off?
Um, I think that, uh, you know, aside from my, uh, initial comments, I think you've heard some really thoughtful comments today. I I, uh, uh, as far as what, uh, David and Jonathan were saying about the the dark side to the side, I I
I can see a middle ground actually where the panelization and the window is actually making a very direct relationship with the panelization in the window that exists in the uh, brick building. And that might be somewhere something between the dancing windows
that you currently have and the no uh just the the the simplicity of the window in the in the gray wall. So that's literally this that next window down >> um is is a parallel to what is existing in the brick and that might be a way of
connecting the buildings in a way that's simpler and elegant. The other thing I wanted to mention to Ann Marie's very important point and Laura I think echoed it if you could go to the slide of the corner there. I'm wondering, Phipe, um,
you know, in these, uh, bow fronts that, uh, we love so much in Boston, um, there is often a change at the end condition, right? When the both when the when the rowouses hit the end of the block, >> they often do something a little bit
different. And I wonder if you could click on that uh slide, the animation slide, I guess. Um, that one or you know, that one. Yeah, that's fine. Like perhaps with this all these in inside curves that are marching down, maybe
that corner is a little hard and if that corner actually was the exception to your rule to your system and act and and actually had a soft corner um instead of a a hard corner um and somehow
incorporated this one story piece that is extending. it wouldn't do exactly what Ann Marie is saying, which is actually pulling the building back. But if you can't um uh do that, maybe the answer is to actually soften that corner
so that as you're coming down the street, there is a change in the rhythm that invites you to to make that turn to roll literally around that corner, which would be very typical actually of u many
of the uh rowhouse conditions that uh exist in in Boston and might be a sort of a middle ground. So, those are just two quick thoughts on uh what I thought were a lot of very thoughtful comments. >> And commissioners, if I could interrupt uh and suggest that as soon as the fire
alarm testing starts, we take a five minute break. We talk to operations. We expect it to be about five minutes. Um so, I would say we should keep going, but as soon as the alarm goes off, five minute break, come back, talk next step, uh take public comments, uh and then talk next steps.
>> Yeah, sounds good, Seth. And um thanks for the the last couple of comments. So I know Ann Marie has her hand up and then I know we are running behind and we have some public comments. So after Ann Marie maybe we will shift Seth to public
comment and then come back and talk about next steps. >> Uh thank you. I just want to a follow-up comment on the corner. So this view that we're seeing here is a view that not many people will see. So, you know, if we were to look at this again or as you
move forward with the planning staff, I would like you to focus on perspectives of people coming down Bowfort and the other street. Um, so that you know that I I feel like this is a little misleading in that it presents
something. So again, and we're seeing this from a distance, so we're getting the benefit of the entire building, but really understanding how people find that driveway entrance. And also thinking about what is the experience for somebody not only driving through,
but walking through that space and again, how does it become a gateway rather than simply a driveway, >> right? >> Thank you. >> Yeah. Thanks, Anmarie. All right. I know Bill has been very patient with his hand up, waiting for
the public comment portion of our meeting. >> So, >> may I have your attention, please? May I have your attention, please? We'll be accepting a test of the fire alarm audiovisisual system. Please disregard all audio visual signals until further
notice. >> 5 minute break, Bill. We'll come back to you as soon as we're That's a long alarm. Linda, do you think the alarm is still going on? >> I just saw that um quick chat message from Seth saying that it was >> okay. Gosh,
>> that's a really long alarm. >> That's What room are they in? >> Just down by the model room. >> Ah, I see. Okay. >> Well, it's quiet here.
I'm watching Seth's body language. I can just see I can see the flash in the window. Can you see? >> I can see it, too. >> Yeah. So, I know it's still going on. >> And yeah. Wow. >> Oh, wait.
>> Linda, this is Ken Chrysuli. Can you hear me? >> Yes, Ken. >> Just want to let you know that some of us are on and we can hear hear you talking just in case you didn't know. That's all. >> Yes. No. No. I know that this is public and uh >> everything is public. >> We're just we're we were just getting a
a little bit bored. So, we thought we'd start a conversation. So, feel free to jump into >> May I join you? No, >> absolutely. >> We're just watching the flash reflection in the um in the glass at the back of the room. So, we can see that the alarm is still going off.
>> Yeah, it would be hard to run a meeting with the alarm going. That would be a good test for anybody who's commenting or proponents who are trying to present. Not a not a good test, just a test. >> Exactly.
>> Is this the first inerson hybrid meeting the BCDC is doing then? >> The sec the second. >> Okay. We did one in November and that was, you know, kind of a we actually didn't have a lot of notice that it was going to be hybrid and so
during that meeting we actually didn't have a camera so people that were joining remotely like we all are could not see people in person. So each meeting is getting a little better. Oh yeah, it is very thorough.
Hopefully, it'll be done in a few minutes. >> Thank you. And good to see you. >> Good to see you, too. >> I still see the flashing. >> So, Linda, would you recommend that us as presenters, we would be there in
person? I am an inerson person. And if I knew this was in person, I would have gotten myself to say, "Oh, but I didn't know that it was a hybrid." >> Well, one of the things we like about um going back to in person is that we can see models. >> Yeah. >> So, it used to be so I joined the
commission in 2010. And so, between 2010 and 2020, we asked commissioners uh proponents to bring models so that commissioners could see it on the table. It was very very helpful. So, um, yes, if you're able to join and
since we have co-chairs, you know, Mimi and I, the other co-chair may try to, you know, be one virtual, one in person and see if that also helps the flow. Yeah. Oh, good. >> Oh, they're coming back. >> Okay.
>> Terrific. >> Can you all hear us? >> Yes, >> we're all alive. >> Glad to hear that. Okay. So, I think where we left it, Seth, is that we were going to um >> go to public comment. It looks like we have three hands up for now and then
we'll come back and talk about next steps. >> Great. And uh a reminder, Lizzie, if you can put up the public comment slide, please. A reminder that starting January 1st, 2026, the commission will limit live public commentary to the project
introduction. Members of the public interested in submitting comments to the commission are encouraged to do so in writing by emailing them to bcbclo.gov at any phase of the project's review and we will communicate them to the commissioners. However, until then, we
will continue to take live public testimony or commentary. So, at this time, we invite any members of the public in attendance who wish to contribute public comments to raise your digital hand and staff will call on you. If you are calling in by phone, dial star9 to activate the raise hand
function and star six to mute unmute yourself. Please state your name and any relevant project affiliation information and please keep comments to two minutes. And Bill Peros has had his hand up for a very long time. So, Bill, please invite
you to unmute um and join the conversation. >> Hi, thanks everybody. I'm Bill Peros and I've lived in the neighborhood at 31 Lakeville Road diagonally across from the existing Roger House for 30 years. I
am in favor of the proposal as redesigned and I really appreciate listening to the neighbors in the neighborhood. My my comment really pertains specifically to the parking availability. What I see here is that they're going to have 15 above ground
spots. Currently, there are 19 spots for just 66 memory care units. They have a second lot on Bowford that is going away, but they were going to put 35 inside the building for staff. And I'm
really concerned because if you add 41 apartments in phase one and consider phase two is going to have equal to if not more. We're talking about a 100 units that are going to be having in-n-out traffic between visitors delivery support staff, food deliveries,
package deliveries, etc. I physically live there and watch what goes on now with just 66 memory care facility units. And I do not believe that there's going to be enough room for people coming and going doing the drop offs the way in
which people live these days. I see it in my own neighbors in my neighborhood. Everything's double parked and the streets are not wide. So, I really feel like there's an inadequate consideration for modern-day
living where people in the um um income subsidized apartments um or adjusted apartments are going to be receiving both visitors, services, physical therapists, respiratory therapists, pharmacy deliveries, um UPS, lift
pickups, um Uber pickups, drop offs. Um, I don't think 15 parking spaces above ground is going to make for a very uh functional facility. And I'd like some com if people could comment on that, I'd greatly appreciate it.
>> Uh, thank you, Bill. Appreciate that. Um, I guess I would like to ask the team to uh speak to their uh parking strategy as well as their approach to uh servicing and loading. Bill, do you want to are you able to
speak to that? Um or if we have Laticia? >> Yeah, I mean I can I mean we have 15 surface parking spaces for visitors. >> Uh and 35 parking spaces below ground for staff.
Um Jeremy, your team is planning to advertise for the 41 apartment and that's in the PNF that these are apartments that have no parking spaces attached to them to deter those >> have cars from signing up for this
housing. >> Correct. And I can elaborate on that a little bit. So, of the 41 units that are the memory care facility, those residents do not have vehicles. Uh, just to clarify that, um, the 41
units in affordable housing, uh, our census tends to be that those folks do not have vehicles being in that type of area. And then being seniors, it's going to be senior housing. uh that that
income bracket that we get that we're proposing and that age, they tend not to have vehicles. It's a low percentage of our total. We're doing a study to, you know, hopefully elaborate on exactly what that percentage is across our portfolio. Um but that is
just sort of sets the stage for what we're doing. We do have food transport and it's very fairly walkable neighborhood as well in that area. So we the folks that will be moving into our residence if they do have a vehicle will generally not apply because we don't
have available parking for them. So it's it's um a type of product that is for folks who don't have a vehicle or walker um have a alternative mode of transportation of bicycles. >> Does that include visitors to those
memory care units? Correct. So the the 15 is for res. Yes. Um they are Yes. They are restricted to visitors but there's no resident there would be no designated resident part.
>> I mean just a quick question comment. I have a parent who's in a memory care unit in another state. Um you go visit them on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, no problem. You can get parking on on on site. go on a weekend or a holiday or
anything like that and it's not good. Um and so I I guess uh I I think this is you know this is not really in our purview u uh to comment on but I do think that to the resident's comment it's something that planning should be
discussing with transportation uh or you know whoever the right people are because um or trying to either maybe plan for overflow situations you know maybe some of the landscape you know can be the kind of landscape where you know
on Valentine's Day or Mother's Day or whatever, um you can, you know, park more vehicles. Uh and that there's some sort of a plan B. Um because I could see that becoming um difficult. And even though a lot of these people are, you
know, going to be in the neighborhood and maybe people are working there from the neighborhood, a lot of the visitors that are coming for special occasions will be coming from the suburbs or will be coming from further a field. Now, you will obviously have much more experience with this than I do, but I'm just talking about my own personal experience
not having to park quite far away. Oh, Um, so I think it's a >> attention, please. The signal time you have just heard indicates a report of an emergency in this building.
>> Really? Do you think Seth that that is legitimate? >> The light is not flashing behind them. >> Yeah. >> Uh this is Ken Chrysuli, vice president of real estate design and construction for Roger Communities. And I just want
to add Bill's question. Um I >> I don't Ken I don't know if they can uh hear you right now. >> Thank you, Linda. Seth, are you able to hear comments while this alarm is going off? >> Oh, it's still going off. I'm sorry.
>> They they just they just uh have a new alarm now. >> Um I think Bill might still be on the line, but Philip Phippe, maybe you can share that, you know, we get to know our family members of our residents and operationally we can implement a parking
plan or a parking routine that you know. So, I'm sorry to interrupt you, Ken, but I think we have to wait till the whole commission comes together. >> Absolutely. I'm sorry. >> Just there's lots of guidelines that we have to abide by and and we want
everyone to appreciate your um responses. >> I also see that >> okay, >> the room is back here. Apologies. >> Okay. >> We will hopefully not be interrupted again. Um I think David was finishing up.
>> Yeah, I just found a button on it. I think that I just wanted to emphasize that um for the public's benefit that this is not within our purview but that uh that we agree that this is something that should be explored uh between planning and the proponent about making
contingencies for those uh those situations where additional parking may be required. >> We we also had a comment um that was happening maybe when when everybody was muted just now. Seth from Ken. So, we
invited him to just pause until everyone was back together. Ken, do you want to go ahead and >> Yeah, just just quickly and thank you for um protocol. Um we we're going from 37 parking spaces to 50 parking spaces. We get to know our resident family
members and their visitors because they come often. They come on a routine basis. We can implement an operational parking procedure or guidelines in regards to with our our our visitors to our residents to make sure that they check the garage spacing. Um, first if
uh if there's no or second if there's no parking in the 15 spaces in the front yard. I I agree with I believe it was Dave uh David's comment about yes we can implement overflow parking situations on site but we are increasing our parking
spaces from 37 to 50. We can implement a procedure where during uh visiting hours we can look at both spaces for parking and we should have some extra spaces just through staff changing and routine operations
um available to handle some increased parking. but to Bill and our neighbors, we will look into that operational procedure and um come up with the best solution that we can with the available parking we have on site to us now. So, that's all I
wanted to offer. >> Seth, >> thank you all. Let's return to public comment if that's okay. >> Two other comments and then I'd love to wrap up. I believe the next hand I have on my screen, uh, Nancy Kger, are you able to
unmute yourself? >> Yes. Thank you very much. I appreciate the opportunity to speak briefly. I live on 16 Bowfort Road. I've also lived here for 30 years. And my main concern, which I've already emailed to Camille Platt Des Costa, is about having a front
entryway on Bowfort as opposed to having the only entryway be on the circular driveway. seeing the traffic that happens if people start dropping people off, picking people up, dropping off deliveries on Bowford Street, it's actually a very narrow street. And the slide that shows on slide 35, I believe
it is, that makes it look like it's this expansive corner for people to come and go. There's actually a house there with three parking lots in front of it, these parking spaces. And so I'm very concerned that I really support the comment that I heard from one of the commissioners about figuring out a way
to have the driveway opening to be more pronounced, to be more inviting, and to make it really clear that is the only place that people can drop people off, pick people up, and put deliveries. Right now, there are landscape trucks that routinely pull up on the side of Bowford. They would be parking right in
front of your building. They come once or twice a week and I you'd have to work that out with them. But it's like that that street is too crowded to have people coming in and out. If you need a fire exit for that front door onto Bowfort Road, it should be a fire egress
where people could leave for safety purposes, but it should not be an entrance that people can go back and forth in because by definition, people will stop there with cars. The street is very narrow as it already is. It is often got double parked cars on it. And so I really would support the version
that you have, but not with a front entryway on Bowfort and instead have the only entryway expanded clearly marked on the round circular drive. I have other comments as well, but that's my main concern. And I think there is a way that you could do something with the front of the building, whether it is the
different design and planters or whatever to change that, but there should really not be a front entryway because the it will make Bowfort impassible in terms of cars that will stop there. on Bowfort Road to be able to let people go in and out the front door.
>> Thank you, Nancy. And I realize that I uh made an error in procedure by asking the proponent to respond to the last question directly. We typically take all public comments and then ask the proponent or the commission to respond if there was any desire to. Um so I will
next call on Edward Burke. Can you unmute yourself? Uh hi, my name is Ed Burke, live at six Bowfort. Uh just a couple of comments. Uh the slides that proponents use as one of the commission members I think has suggested don't give
us a sense of what this facade is going to look like. Uh for those of us who are on foot lots of times, the arches when I we just looking at these distance uh schemes that have been uh pictures that have been presented, I said, "My gosh,
that looks like the side of an a mosque rather than um uh in an attempt to to blend with the arches on the pawnside building." You know, I I just from a design point of view, I leave it to some of you who are more expert than I am
about that. Also, one of you suggested, why do we need all those arches? Uh or maybe just eliminate them all. Do the arches, both the design and the number of them, do they really work? Do they add value? I don't know. Second point,
uh we don't I would love to see some uh close-up views of the brick that would be used. Is it consistently all one color? or are there different shades? Uh, do they blend well with not only the pawn side but also with the Forbes
building? Uh, the brick seems a little purplish. Uh, is it going to add value to the ambiance of the of the street, the belleaguered street? Uh, especially uh it's going to become a lot more busy. So, those are some comments that I'd
like to make. I appreciate the opportunity for the public input. Thank you. Thank you, Ed. Um, I am not seeing any more hands. Just want to check make sure there is no more public comment. Uh, so
with that, I will close the public comment period and turn it back to the commissioners uh and see if uh any conversation on that is needed or discussion of next steps. >> Thanks, Seth. Uh, so commissioners, we had a great and robust conversation and
we are at 6:32. So, um, >> Yep. >> I'll make a motion. >> Um, so >> just before you, uh, do that, David, I just wanted to I took a quick series of
notes about, um, kind of broad ideas that commissioners wanted to be, um, continued to look at. So, can I state those, David, and then maybe we can wrap them up into the motion together? >> 100%. Please go. Please go.
>> Okay. All right. So, I think commissioners uh wanted to have a little bit more of a robust look with planning staff at the entry at Bowfort, pulling it back, creating a stronger entry or even softening the curve were all ideas
that were raised. A second topic was to keep the landscape discussion open. This included phasing um developing the landscape in more detail and also to think about how the landscape might better interface with the architecture
itself. Uh the next bucket was looking really at the windows. Um particularly on the metalclad portion of the building and looking at opportunities for making that
potentially more regular, having it in a stronger conversation with the brick portion and just looking at the um proportion of metal panel and wood panels, etc. And then the last kind of
bold uh series of of comments was around parking and access adequacy. So with with those kind of four buckets of thought, David, go ahead. >> And Philip, I see your hand. >> No, >> but I think we're going to move to
motion if we can. anything to that? >> Um, I think that uh I think that with those notes with Linda's notes in mind as uh advisory to planning staff as they further review the project that I would make a motion to approve the project.
>> So moved. >> Second. >> We have a second. >> All right. All in favor >> as many seconds. >> That's fine. We'll take a chorus of seconds. Um, all in favor, please say I. Jonathan Garland,
>> I. >> Shauna Gilly Smith, >> I. >> David Hassin, >> hi. Mc Young Kim. >> Hi >> Kathy Karitz. >> Hi. >> Any Lubenau?
>> I >> David Manfred. >> I >> David Nagiro >> I. >> Lara Solano >> I. >> And myself Linda Eastley. I. You are approved and uh we look forward to
seeing great things. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you all. >> Thank you all. Thank you very much. Thank you to the proponent team. >> Okay. >> All right. >> And after much delay, apologies, >> and a fire or two fire alarms, we're
we're going to deputize everybody in this meeting. >> Uh as a honorary fire marshal for city hall. >> Yes, exactly. So, I think our our last project tonight is 55 Landsown Street, Fenway Corners North. Um, Seth, can you
invite Commissioner Sykes back for this presentation? And David Hine, I believe you are recused. >> So, this is the proponent. >> And David is walking out the door. >> Okay.
>> Thank you, David. >> Thank you. >> So, this is the proponent's third presentation to us at BCDC. Commissioners Garland, Gilly Smith, Karitus, Love, Nagahiro, and myself were at the
last subcommittee which was in October. So we will um share comments first after the proponent has finished the presentation and um commissioners if we can. >> May I have your attention please? May I have your attention, please? The test of the fire alarm.
Uh, so Linda, now that we have a little break, I I'm sorry to say that I actually have to leave by 7:15 to pick up my son. >> I remembered that. I remembered that. >> I had thought, "Oh, it's only two projects. We'll definitely be out by >> system."
If it were a real emergency. >> Okay. >> May I have your attention, please? May I have your >> Why I'm laughing? It's not really funny. >> I think we have to put this on our comedy reel. Seth, if we have a BCDC
comedy reel, >> we we used to when we would meet in person, we would often the lights would go off. The lights go off at 11:00. >> That Yeah. >> And so, >> okay, I think we are back and ready.
>> Okay. Well, we were in the peanut gallery there for a minute. >> All right. So, uh, Commissioners Garland, Gilly Smith, Katarus, Love, Nagahiro, and myself were at the last one. So, we will take those comments first after the proponents presentation.
And commissioners, um, if we can keep our collective comments to 30 minutes, that is always the goal, and that allows us to have some time for the public to ask theirs as well. So, with that, uh, I think we're ready for the WS team to
begin their presentation. Great. Uh, thank you very much, uh, Chair Eastley. Uh, my name is Yanni Sus. I'm joined by David Friedman from the Fenway Sports Group. Um, fire alarms notwithstanding, it feels awfully good to be back in person. So, thank you all
very much for uh, accommodating. Um, and thank you for all of your um, comments going away. I think I'm just going to call for next slide if that's okay. Sorry, I should have brought an advancer. Um, but this is um, uh, 55 Landown Street. Maybe next slide,
please. We go. Um, and I'm sorry, I'm gonna look at the screen, look at the table. So, sorry if if I have my back to to anyone. By the way, we're also joined by several members of the Fenway Sports Group team. Um, on screen, Jonathan Galula uh, and Claire Durant and also Victoria
Magcguire from WS Development on um, who's with us virtually along with our design team. Uh, and we'll try to be uh, as brief as possible. Uh so the project site of course 55 lands down street uh straddling uh lands down street and the Massachusetts turnpike. Next slide
please. Um to recap our review process very briefly. We started this process six months ago in uh in June of 2025. We had a subcommittee meeting a couple months ago and then we're before you this evening. I want to emphasize the amount of time we've also spent with planning
department staff both leading up to the initial presentation and then uh in the intervening uh months you know continuing to make changes to the project as we as we went. Next please. And uh we'll you know we'll we'll go over just very briefly a summary of kind
of the comments that we heard from the commission. Um and then we'll show you a number of the studies that we did uh in response and sort of net show you where we net out neted out uh in terms of the different topics. Um but and we won't go through all of these in in great detail because we we think the studies will
sort of do the talking. But we we received a number of comments about building architecture and a number of comments about landscape and public realm um especially around the desire to sort of do something simpler, more elegant uh to embrace the use of reclaimed materials. and in both cases
really embrace the grit and grain of the of the surrounding urban fabric. Next, please. Um, and so we'd like to start by sharing with you some of the studies we've done regarding building architecture in response to comments received from the commission uh primarily around the um
composition and the nature of the sort of mega frame that embraces the overall uh project uh masking. Next slide please. And so the project as it was submitted um uh you can see here it's a predominantly red brick building seven
stories sort of steps back off street uh and then it's it's embraced by a literally and figuratively by a sort of a a mega frame uh type element that you can see uh shown here and we were asked to study a number of iterations uh of
the building architecture. On the next slide, it'll see we were asked to study iteration, which we showed you at the at the meeting last time that simply stripped away um the the mega frame and let let the brick uh stand out on its own. I think we explained last time why we didn't we didn't love this outcome
for the building. Uh there was a suggestion, next slide please, that perhaps we look at stopping the the mega frame like twothirds of the way up the building at the fourth floor. Uh and so we we we had the Morris Ame Jack Gardner team uh look at this scenario as well.
Here you see that outcome and I'm not going to give commentary on every single piece of it. We'll we'll sort of get through all of these and if we can come back to any of them during discussion, but we looked at this uh as as an alternative. Next slide, please. We looked at alternatives that kind of
varied or refined the the thickness, the dimensionality of the framing itself and also where the framing stood in in plane. Um, so we looked at a thinner framing that sort of skinnied everything up. Next slide, please. We looked at a framing that was had the same dimensions as the original, but set it back more
flush with the brick uh facade. Sort of an inset approach. Next slide, please. We looked at several color iterations. We looked at a Fenway green uh to be very pedantic about it. Uh uh next we looked at a lighter gray. We looked at
next we looked at a red brick. It you know to try to sort of go through the full range of kind of color and style options or alternatives here. Uh on the next slide please. And ultimately we we and we're happy to have the design team speak to this all. So, we felt like the
studies were were were worthwhile to do if only to prove to ourselves and hopefully to the commissioners that kind of our original direction is probably where we'd like to end up. However, we also want to emphasize for the commission that we're at the schematic
design level of design. Like we're not, you know, we haven't refined the dimensions, we haven't refined the connections, we haven't optimized things. And that's certainly something that we expect the design team to do as we continue to move forward through design review with DPD staff. Um but ultimately we didn't feel like any of
those studies um you know were the best outcomes for the building you know considering the totality on the landown street elevations. Let's move to the facing elevation. Yeah please. >> Is this still doing any work? No. No.
This is these are nonstructural uh elements similar to um you know 2011 or 420 like you know it's it's a it's an architectural slide. Next please on the pike facing elevation of the
building we won't call this the back but the the north elevation facing the turnpike. Um there was some really I think good comments about uh wanting to perhaps have the building embrace a bit of a different scale given the the two different types of environments. So we looked at again a range of scenarios
here. Next slide please. We looked at oh sorry back one. A scenario that simply stripped away the the the grid of framing and just allowed the you know the brick elevations to sort of be framed at a larger scale with the with the metal uh framing. Next
slide. You know these are just a series of iterations. Maybe we only do this on the north elevation facing the turnpike, not on the west elevation. Maybe we uh organize the scale of the framing a little bit differently that so as to express a larger scale um and you at a
larger organization and hierarchy. This does not have the diagonal braces. Next slide please. This does have the diagonal braces. Uh next slide please. Um we looked at there was some commentary last time about perhaps we look at ganging the the windows differently. This you know looking at
different penistrations. So here we have double story window. um aggregation. On the next slide, we have quadruple story window aggregation. Again, just playing with scale, playing with same materials pallet, same sort of basic part, but playing with scale and dimension. And
ultimately where we ended up, next slide, please. Oh, sorry. Um we also we were asked to look at a a treatment that on the pike site had metal panel. And so we we looked at a scenario that that on this north elevation had a metal panel
expression versus carrying the brick all the way around. Um uh next and in general and where we've ended up is we actually thought the comments about the scale from the turnpike side versus the Landstone Street side were
really well placed. And so we've modified the proposed kind of framing organization such that the the framing now is less dense. It's it it is a little bit less intense and it organizes the elevation at a larger scale. So now we just have the verticals. We've
stripped out the horizontals so that the you know as you drive by this hopefully at a at a higher rate of speed the building makes a little bit more sense. It's organized at a at a larger scale than uh than on the Landon Street side for example. So this is we think the the
studies yielded a better result in this case. Uh next please. Um one other point to make again this is all this review is happening at a schematic level and we have a lot of work left to do with the Morris Age Jack
Gardner team um on the brick detailing. you know, so so much of this building and how people are going to experience it at pedestrian level is going to be based on the brick detailing. And so we don't have exactly the dimension of the bricks and the corbling and so forth, but you know, we know that the the
Morris Ame team has an incredible repertoire and an incredible um experience with this along with the Jack Gardener team. And so as again, as this project goes through design review, working with my department staff, this is going to be a big topic. and right up as the architects in the room know right
up through the BMU um and uh and beyond. So uh we wanted to at least share this and I think another example on the next slide just of some of Morris's work >> and Yanni just over half time. >> Okay, thank you. Perfect. Uh just to emphasize this going to be an important
topic to us. Next please. Um another uh significant change we made to the project and this is you know when we talk about the public realm um this we think this is a significant change is we have this pass through which we call the loft this aperture in the building we started this project started its
review process with a storefront enclosure of the loft. Next slide please. We've since removed it and then we'll speak in a minute about how the the the floor of the loft the the public expression of the loft actually spills out onto the public sidewalk. So hold that thought. Uh and then lastly on the
architecture front, next slide please. We were asked to look at the approach to public art that this building would adopt, especially as it relates to um I think Beth used the term coloring outside the lines like not allowing the the public art zones or not constraining
the public art zones in this building to the specific framed elements. So we we these are diagrams which will inform the process of selecting both artists and individual art pieces as we move forward. But we wanted to share with the commission that this was as uh next
slide uh please that this was generally these were the zones where we envision incorporating you know large scale public art. Next slide please. And we're using the bubble uh instead of a hard line to conote that we you know we think
that art could could sort of spill over big pieces of this building without being constrained by the metal framing or or you know the base spacing or otherwise. Uh, next slide please. Uh, and in more of the same
illustration. Next slide, please. So, again, as we, this is this is an illustration of what we're is inspirational, but again, we think the murals and public art can spill out beyond the framing that you see here. Next slide, please.
Uh and so when as it relates to building architecture, we think the building as it's, you know, now designed will work really nicely with the landown street uh pedestrian realm. The turnpike a more vehicular realm. Uh and let's turn our attention to changes to the public
realm. This is as much about the public realm and where humans interact with the building as it is about building architecture. Next slide, please. Uh so we were we were asked to to make a number of changes to the public realm design and we basically completely changed the design of the sidewalk and
streetscape. Next slide please. In the public realm we've taken a simple but elegant and hopefully very legible approach. So rather than having um you know different bands of pavers and different type colors of pavers and furnishing zones and land different
landscape features working both with staff and listening to the commission's feedback. We've we've tried to simplify all that and start with a very simple very gritty concrete flatwork space and then as we zoom in on the next slide please.
You know the sidewalk gets a lot wider. Right now it's maybe eight or 10 feet depending where you are. becoming 21 ft. But it's really emphasizing two points as we change the materiality of the sidewalk. One being the pass through of the loft which will have a a granite stone slab floor which will then spill
out across the public sidewalk and in the lobby of the building that same intervention the the granite slab which will spill out uh across the public sidewalk. And then rather than a bunch of street trees and landscape beds, which we think will suffer greatly given the operational constraints of Landstone
Street, we're actually going to be using some reclaimed granite foundation footings that we found across town and have set aside for a different day. And we'll be organizing those in front of the in front of the building as you see here. Next, please. So, as we zoom in, what you'll see is
both in front of the pass through and in front of the lobby, we will organize these granite blocks um in ways that form both seating groups for social interaction, but also we'll introduce a security element for the building uh given the nature of of Landstone Street
and the uses here. Next slide, please. And so the you know these are very simple renderings but they illustrate the simplicity the overall simplicity of the sidewalk the significant interventions where there are major public access moments lobby and loft and then these sort of sprinkled found uh
granite block objects. Next slide please. Which will occupy the more traditional sort of furnishing zone at the at the curve edge. So very simple, very elegant, but we think, you know, will work really, really well for this location in terms of the grid, the urban nature, and the operational constraints.
Next slide, please. The original materials pallet was had a lot of texture to it. This is when we first started this process, but there were a lot of concerns about accessibility. Next slide, please. So along the way, we showed the commission
a a um a less textured pallet, but we were encouraged to to think more um simply and elegantly and embrace maybe some reclaimed materials. So, next slide, please. The current landscape pallet relies on, of course, the concrete flat work, but also reclaimed
granite slabs and blocks um in the in the streetscape. Next slide, please. >> One minute. Yeah, >> great. Uh these are the actual blocks that we've set aside from across town that we would love to use in this. These are the footings from the old summer street bridge. Uh next slide please.
We've we've deployed a few of them uh uh in other ways. Next slide please. And you can see that they make really beautiful beautiful outcomes. So uh comments from the commission. Next slide please. Uh a number of things that we've changed building architecture public realm and
the loft. The next slides I think are just a recitation just a sort of a hit parade of the things we've changed the loft. Next slide. The north elevation of the building. Next slide. Um and the public realm design. Next slide. And then the the artwork zones but
with that we'll we'll say thank you and tell you uh share with you how excited we are to hopefully get going on this building which might be one of the only office buildings with a hope of breaking ground of Austin 2026. But we're optimistic. We thank the commission very much for your time. Thanks for your
patience during this presentation and look forward to your comments. Thank you. >> Yanni, thank you for your presentation and keeping it compact to 15 minutes. We appreciate that. >> Thank you. >> Um Seth is going to uh keep track of
hands in person and commissioners that are joining remotely um please use your digital hand. Laura Solano also let me know that she had participated in that October subcommittee. So, we invite hers and her and others that were attending
that one to please kick us off. Kirk, I see your hand. You're on mute, I think. Kirk, >> I I was not in the last subcommittee, so I don't believe so. I'll let uh those who were first speak.
>> Sounds good. I think there were six of us there. Do we have any commissioners that were at that last subcommittee that would like to make a comment first? David, do I see your hand?
>> No, you didn't. But I'm going to jump in because I have to leave before uh and thanks for giving me the opportunity. Um, I saw the original presentation. I don't think I was at the last I know I wasn't
at the last one. Um, and there's a lot of things I like about this building. I I love that you're thinking about that path through. I know you must have a big idea in mind of where it's going to go and take you and
that's a pedestrian connection that could be incredibly valuable in this. Uh, and I think that's a really big idea. Um, I I think overall the the massing of the building, materiality of the building feels really strong. Uh,
and appropriate lands down street and appropriate the the the green monster and all the structure that's across the street. I think those are all positive things. I like the Yeah, I think you use the word I like the word grittiness. There's a real strength and substance uh
to this building and and uh uh there's there's a certain amount of groundness about lands down street that makes this all very appropriate. Uh and and and I say that in all positive ways. I'm troubled a little by the fact that the that you do have I love the
structure of the of the green monster. Um uh the idea that can leave it out over the street. You made seats where there was only sky. Uh, and they're and they're um, you know, that they're they're favorites. People love them. Uh,
um, and and that troubles me a little bit, but I I'm I'm not going to get hung up on it. I think that's your your your choice here. And I don't think it um, negatively impacts the public realm in any way. I guess I really only have and and I like the I love your the big
granite blocks. There's a there's a strong storyline that runs through everything you're doing here. Your detailing, the brick detailing is um um has has depth and quality to it. I'm I'm
assuming it's all hand going to be handmade brick. Uh and uh but it's not fussy and this building shouldn't be fussy. Um, yeah, there's a I have one question and I'm not sure and it showed up twice in your presentation >> and it's the frame. When you turn the
frame and go around from the short ends onto the pike, >> yeah, >> you go from a twotory stack to a fourstory stack. And I'm not sure I like I actually like this. Yeah. Right there. Why do you do that? And why would you do
that? the it it you know it is ornamentation. I don't mean that negatively. Um but why wouldn't it be consistent around the building? I actually like the four story, >> but that's just an opinion. >> Uh but I don't know, but I'm I'm very
uneasy about why it changes on an outside corner like that. >> Yeah. >> And and I think in one other place you have another version of it. >> Yeah. It's if you go I'm so sorry. Um, if you go back to where we were looking at all those various iterations, the one
that we actually settled on as our preferred option. Keep going. Sorry. >> Keep going. Keep going. Keep going. You almost there. Keep going. Yep. Uh, no. Right there. Sorry. >> That's the one we This is the one we preferred for exactly the reason. Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner. No,
we it would look odd. Yes. Yes. >> And that tracks on the east side. >> Yes, sir. Yep. We didn't show that, but yes. Yep. Exactly. So that those are my only comments. I I I I'm uh I'm I'm really happy to see you go forward and
obviously a bill to shoot for the right time. That's the world we live. >> We hope these guys like it. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, David. >> Hi. >> Um David Nagahiro has his hand up and I note that you were part of that last subcommittee as well, David.
>> Yeah, I actually was going to ask the same question David just asked. So, um I do think that um I appreciate the the studies be the rigor of, you know, taking to heart the comments from the uh commission because I know there's a lot
of design that goes in behind the scenes and a lot with the BPD before it even gets here. So, thank you for that. Um I do think that you came to the uh it feels like the right conclusions based on the comments that were made last time. I I still uh think that the frame
is is nice. I do think that the coloring of the frame uh is appropriate in comparison to, you know, the studies that you did. So, um I think it came to a nice conclusion, you know, based on the comments. Uh this was probably the
side that I had most concern for with the uh the actual cage that wrapped this building, and now it feels like it's a little bit less heavy-handed that way. So, um I just think that um the qualities of the simplicity of the public realm I think make a lot of sense
as well. Um it'll be interesting to hear um Laura's uh comments. She had made some pretty strong comments in the last round on the uh sidewalk in the public realm and the benches. Um I do like um that the building recedes the way it
does on the uh the other side. if you can go to that side for a second. Uh Johnny, >> thank you. >> I know there's a >> Yeah, I think this side I think is I I really do like the frame and what it
does for the quality of those uh balconies and the and the idea of the relationship of the um the green monster and the framework. I think as a backdrop to Fenway, I think this feels very appropriate. So, uh I I do think that
the the key to this is all in the details, which I think your you know, your architecture team is very skilled at this type of uh detailing. So, um I'm excited to see the this uh this project built. Thank you.
>> Thank you very Thank you. We appreciate it very much. Can I jump in? >> Uh, yes you can, Kirk. I was just taking people that were part of the meeting. >> Sorry. If you want to jump back in, please do. >> No, only only because I think this view
is um is very telling along with the view from the pike. Um, so I'm going to I'm going to be the contrarian here and that's why I wanted the folks who uh had been at the prior meetings uh to comment.
One of the things that I see when I look at this view is the lightness as it goes up. Um, I think there's a clear, you know, sort of, uh, expression of both the cladding of the park and the
superructure that you see here. And, and I think it's kind of an opportunity. If I were going to deconstruct the park and apply it to your building, I I would kind of I would probably argue that above the levels of the first two stories, you have an opportunity to have
a cladding transition potentially, which could uh begin to express some of the lightness that you see in the park. And and I would also offer that you might look at all the other facads of the park and see if that's true because if you go
to the view from the pike, I think there is an opportunity to message what happens on the other side of the street and on the facade of the actual Fenway Park by thinking differently about
stories, whatever. uh everything orthagonal above the candid um superructure up and there's a bit of a precedent for us in the way we've thought about the pike um whether it's Alustin Yards or you know even the
graffiti wall that you've mimicked here but the uh the one further down where House of Blues is it's it's kind of art on the pike in a way and and I think you have an opportunity to take advantage of that within this
frame that kind of rationalizes the frame above the two um the sort of base base levels of the first two on the street and this one that's uh within the the slopes
superructure. So, um I mean this may not have been the view expressed, but I do think there is potential to go back and look at those lighter panels that are present on the park. Uh that could be happening above a brick base course on
the first two levels of the street and then wrapping on around onto the uh right of way for the trains. So anyway, personal personal view opportunity. I think there's no wrong way to go at this, but it it does feel very heavy
when you look you had a view looking the other way uh at this elevation that you might go to. um that feels very very heavy and a bit constrained on the
upper stories to me. But it's a it's a personal preference and I think I I understand why you might do what you've done. But uh let me stop there. >> Thank you very much >> and Marie and then Laura.
>> So I'm going to take a slightly different t. Could you go to slide number 14 please? Um I have been I I have to be frank I have mixed feelings about the the frame. Um but I will you know I understand this
has been through a process. I you know there there's a very intentional approach or what see appears to me in the design to to um that is reminiscent of warehouse design. you know, in part because of that exposed frame, in part because the
brick and just even the massing of the building, it's almost when you there's an overhead view where it almost reminded me of a frighter. It's kind of large. Um, and I've been looking at the first level and the awnings and there just seems to be a disconnect there. And
I wonder if I what I would recommend as you continue to develop this is to look at some examples of warehouse structures like the Boston Design Center or um 401 Park, the former landmark center. You
know, there the awnings are part of the architecture of the building. And I wonder if there might be because this is so much of a public space, I can't help but think there might be some value in creating continuous awning that also provides some shelter that both I think
would be more consistent with the architecture of the building and would be a contribution to the public realm. That said, I realized there are negotiations or assumptions that go into leasing with retailers and expectations about branding or distinction, but it's
just something that's a recommendation I would make a suggestion as you continue to develop the design. Thank you. >> Um, Laura, and then Jonathan has his hand up after you. >> Me, too. >> Oh, and then
>> and Sean. Okay, great. >> Could we go to a site plan? Um something that shows the entire uh block. I know you have a enlargement, but you also have one that shows the entire block in plan. There we go.
>> Yeah. So I'm going to mention something that you talked about last time that I think is really important and I have a suggestion for making it more so which is that last time you spoke about sort
of this village that happens after games right the occupancy of the street and I think that's right and one thing that you have um on I think the other plan which you don't need to change to is the
words flexible space. And I think that's really important and I'm glad that you've looked at things much more simply and that it doesn't feel as if um you were trying to translate this into anything other than it being this, you
know, kind of deeper in the city. It's not Newberry Street, you know, it's it's sort of the the much cherished sort of backdoorish of u many parts of Boston. And so I really applaud you with that. I think
you need to be very careful about that exposed aggregate for the same reason. You don't want it to look overpolished. You don't want to imitate granite. I think it can be something that is much more grounded to the area. And then um I
do appreciate the the pavement, but I have a a suggestion, the in inset panels, and that is that those be joined into a much larger carpet that goes in front of there. And I'm I'm mentioning
this for a couple of reasons. One is I think in terms of spillage and space that could be used on weekends or after hours that that in itself could be a little bit more elegant um because of
the materiality of it. So it would basically fill in that um blue space that's between the pass through and the lobby. I also think that that it would help to give more emphasis to those two
because there's a there would be a generosity there that I think would read as you were going down the street. Um I know we talked last time I don't remember saying no tree but no matter I I'm not um and I think the discussions
are >> I don't remember that either actually. >> Oh okay. So that's fine. And and I also remembered that there were a lot of um obstacles, utility obstacles, etc. for getting any
kind of regularity. But maybe um with the um the stone uh carpet, I'll call it, you might consider whether or not a tree or two or three could go in that area to really
distinguish it from the rest of the place. Not so much visually or marking, but in terms of character, in terms of options for that flexible space that you're talking about. In other words, you do something much different under
trees than you would kind of, you know, being held by the buildings that are on either side of landstone. >> So, those are um >> Laura, >> yes. Sorry, if I could just respond to the comment about trees because uh we did
discuss this at length with the proponent uh and I think it was after the last either the introduction or the subcommittee um you know uh we took a hard look at the existing trees that are on the street, the health of those trees, the feasibility of trees uh given the
traffic and the usage of the street and I think you know felt that it was appropriate that you know to explore a scheme without trees and so that was the direction that we gave. Um whether that's, you know, exactly where we wind up or we decide there is uh an
appropriate, you know, level of, you know, landscaping for this, that's what we're here to discuss >> and and John can speak more specifically to this. >> Yeah, thanks. >> As well, >> thanks for that. >> I just wanted to I just wanted to
interject also um and and sorry, can you can you all hear John? John, you may need to come to the table. >> Yes. I just wanted to interject also that the planning department did engage the disabilities commission to discuss the commissioner's proposal about the
use of reclaimed materials um as paving and we did hear that the disabilities commission is not likely to support use of granite in the pedestrian zone specifically of the sidewalk. it was supported in the um furnishing zone, but
I think that should be taken into consideration with the the current deployment that is shown out there. Thanks. >> Thank you. >> Sorry Laura, it's still still going. Is it I might speed up after is Laura still going?
>> Are you still there, Laura? >> Yes. Can I continue or should I wait? >> Yes. >> Laura, why don't you wrap up and then we'll shift to Jonathan and Shauna? Sure. And and by the way, I think it could be a fine space without trees, but
I also think that introducing a tree could also help to provide that variety of space. I won't say anything more about that. Um, I appreciate the the used blocks. I think it's a brilliant idea and those are beautiful stones and
they feel appropriate to the area. They're not too finished. Um, and this is just a a comment about studying whether or not the arrangement that you're showing is um quite right. I think that there needs to be um what I
always call air within those spaces so that it doesn't feel as if it's this band of of blocks. But I think that's something that you will work out um in the long term. But I just thought I'd mention that I love the idea. I think
just the arrangement needs more study. And um I also noticed that there's, you know, alterations to those benches with um wood, etc. And I would just be really careful about that. Um and have a light
hand in whatever you do. So that's it. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. John, can I go just because it's related and won't be so that was actually one of my questions because you know and I know that was one of the things from the last committee
meeting is will you be able to pull this up with the support of the city. It sounds like that's going to be that will be likely a challenge >> that's fresh fresh off the presses. So that wasn't something that we've been able to convey. We just got that back today. Yeah, >> we figured we'd take in the commentary and then figure
>> so I think I'm not saying that's not going to happen, but I think um so so first of all, thank you for for taking our comments in into account. I really really wish that that the imagery was consistent, that the landscape ideas
were represented in the architecture views because seeing all of the street trees and talking about no street trees and then things that are very um very sketchy conceptual, this is just, you know, obviously not true. So, it's it's hard to put together. I'm
And I think a lot of what you're talking about makes perfect sense for game day. But I'm not so convinced that the streetscape is awesome on non-game days, which you know, maybe for worse, maybe for better. Um, is so I I think
that and then that possible, which you know is is something obviously I've encountered a lot and I'm sure you've encountered a lot in your work. how to how to get that grittiness and energy that still works and survives and has
enough texture that can you know that can carry the street on the non-game days. Um I think is is you know will be a challenge. Um there may be a strategy of you know those
bumpouts again becoming becoming where you're putting the papers you know the the the reclaimed stone which is much nicer than the papers. Um I think you had a in your press. Can you go to your president images? >> You forward a few
>> because I actually I'm not >> talking talking about the days um the non-game days. I want um Okay. Go. It's in one of these. I don't know which one it is. It's one that has the trees in it. Trees. Okay. Top of the top middle.
So um the the idea of potential of studying the possibility of including trees that are protected by your granite, >> you know, by your granite system because they are going to be super vulnerable on
game days. But you know, large trees kind of protected in that manner. And maybe that whole frontage actually becomes a composition of these different these different textures, these different um paving textures, the grounded textures which are beautiful
and some you know some greenscape whether it's trees or something else but just you know like uh super tough rock garden kind of thing or something because I think on the days that the games don't happen it would be nice to have something other than just plain
concrete out there. Um, so those are my comments mainly. >> Thank you, Shauna. >> I do think that the the retail sort of the primal accessorization, cafe seating, I mean, we've created now a canvas with the twice wide. So, I do
think that when we get to the point of retail storefront guidelines, science guidelines, furnishing guidelines, etc. going to be super important because that's where the energy and the beauty is going to be. >> Yeah. the non-game days we agree entirely >> and and interesting that that's just one sort of followup that from Anarie's
comment that um that the that the canopy um guidelines >> yeah that's that from neutral pier to neutral pier and spandro like that's you know both in elevation and in plan in terms of like what happens in there is going to be really important
>> tenant by tenant >> because I think it would be more interesting to have a rich range rather than you guys build stuff that that have that have great, you know, sort of >> somewhat prescribed guidelines for dimensions that that make it interesting. >> That's right. >> Okay.
>> Sorry, John. >> Oh, no. >> Yeah. I just >> um so um so could you could you flip back to maybe one of your I don't know who's been showing. Flip that to one of the slides uh showing your options.
>> Um I think it might be around slide 18 or 20. Y >> and um you know while you're finding that I I just want to congratulate you guys on uh or maybe one closer closer to the lands down >> side. There was one image where you went
up only for the second year. >> Yeah. Um but just I you know congratulate because the last time we were here there was a myriad of comments and we found a clever way of synthesizing that into a a understandable sequence of things and
and how to sort of go through them. Um, I think of all the options I see the most value here. And maybe it's not a landing point, but I guess what I mean is it it takes the would you the mega frame,
>> the armature and and kind of keeps it still at a pedestrian scale. um speaking mainly with reference to the green monster and how that again you can compare that to the size of people and I I just get nervous about seeing it essentially take off up to the high roof
lines because I fear that it kind of over accentuates the scale or the the heaviness of it. And I do think it has a nice quality at the base of the building. Um, and typically when I'm thinking about a building, I expect to
see the heaviness or the heft of the building at the grade. And it seems like that same heft has gone all the way up to the roof line. So here I see that there's somewhat of a middle ground. >> And I also am curious if there were to be a view from inside the park and
you're looking out at this building, what would you see? because I'd also be nervous that that building could overpower the strength of the park itself >> because the size and just its steel. So, it's a heavy I think uh Commissioner Love now mentioned the warehouse. It's a
it's a steel is a strong heavy it gives a heavy connotation and for that to go right up to the roof line without I I get nervous about. So, at least this starts to get my eye back down to the activity and the the general scale of
Lands Down Street, and I think it talks more to the to the uh to the Green Monster structure. Uh if you if you can flip to the uh Pike side view >> and go to the one where you have the darker metal facade
>> towards the end. There you go. >> Yes. Um, I I might be alone on this, but I like this one the best. And And I the only change I would probably make, well, two changes, is to take the brackets off the bottom. Um, they're not structural,
right? Take the brackets off the bottom >> and also take the brackets off the side of the brick. I feel like that mega frame >> to me is an element that speaks to Landown Street. I don't think it's represents the volume of the building. I think there's a this is a nice
opportunity to have a pike side of the building said an opportunity for art and opportunity to have the pike communicate to the facade in a planer fashion and then use the brackets to talk to landsdown. These two sides I'm not sure
need the metal infill because in some ways it weakens the purpose of the brick if the you know if the metal needs to be there with along with the brick. But I do think there's something really strikingly nice and attractive about this dark
facade on Rams down. I can see that being creating energy on the pipe when you're kind of zipping by at night. And so I I personally really like this one. >> Um and I think my Oh, last there you also had a view uh when you talked about
the art on the side. There was uh you had some just blank walls. Keep going forward >> on the side. Keep going. Keep going. There you go. Backward. There you go. Yes. Yes. So, if you look to the far far left. >> Yeah. >> I think the mega frame it just be nice
to see maybe that the two ends not having the frame. There's something about just seeing the frame come all the way out to the end. Uhhuh. >> And um I'm I just I would be curious to see if you kept the frame like inboard to the facade and just didn't have it on
the very end here. The diagonal mega frame I'm talking about. You see the diagonal piece on this side and then on the far opposite side. Maybe perhaps take them off and just let them be more internal to the facade. >> Um last comment is about lighting.
>> I'm curious about your approach to lighting. Um, street lighting, of course. I'm sure you're going to work with Boston standards and get that right, but just are you thinking about uplighting or accentuating the mega frames in any in any way? And I'd be curious about that in just the position
to the park lighting and maybe how that might work. >> Yeah. Yeah. I'm not on the lighting front. I'm not sure we yet know what the strategy like where the Mastice should be. Should it be on the brick? Should it be on the mega frame? Yeah. I think we'll look at both of those and certainly with staff on that because that's going to be really important.
>> But I think it's a great project. I'm sure you'll land at the right spot with staff and congrats on getting to this point. Thank you. Appreciate it very much. >> Thank you, Jonathan. I I'll jump in after you because um Jonathan, you and I had some similar comments.
So, you know, this is a a really long building in such an exciting part of the city. And I I think similar to the commissioner comments at these meetings, um I you know that the exoskeleton of this of this building is going to evoke
really strong emotions um along this street. And and I'm not saying that's necessarily a bad thing. I think it it's such a unique design and and Bostononians are going to have feelings about that. Um I I really like
the slide where you were showing some of the architectural precedents and those projects >> which I think are really beautiful and strong and it um it gives me encouragement that as this project proceeds that you'll bringing be
bringing in some of those powerful elements. All right. I'm sorry. Is this the the detailing is going to be so important >> because you know pedestrians. >> Yeah. So some of these project
>> so I think that these are really strong and and um and again I think having this direction and even that next slide it was either the next one or the one back that you just had on. Yes. I think that that these kind of give us a sense of, you know, what the
spirit of the design might be as you as you get into more of the details. >> Um, having said that, I also uh really prefer the slide eight approach, I think, for a couple of reasons. One is
the one that Ann Marie alluded to. She was actually talking about integrated awnings. Do you mind if we go back to slide eight? Yes. So, Amry was talking about the warehouse, kind of the spirit of of a warehouse building and what's its place
in this district in Boston and can you think about some of the ways that's been handled in the city with integrated awnings and other things. The reason I like that comment and and I actually really appreciate this design study is that I think that it helps to
create a really strong base. I think the base of this building um is strong and would be even stronger if you were to kind of think about those integrated pieces. Then you have a clear sense of where that middle is. And then it allows the top to be lighter um and and to be
this special moment. And and I think that it's very compelling, at least to me. And I think it also has uh I think we were talking about kind of the the dance of the of this building with with the green monster, right? it as you're
tipping and you're tipping and um and so I I would love to see this be explored more as you continue to work with planning staff and see if there's something here, you know, worth worth redeeming and maybe there's a um kind of happy medium as you go forward. So, I
just wanted to to get that comment um out there. And Seth, I don't see any other commissioner hands. So, >> Linda, could I make a quick comment? Of >> course. Um just I would just reiterate uh Enry's comment. I think the if you
were to look at uh the meatacking district in New York and the metal canopies there, there's something about the grit about those that really land these buildings in a really beautiful way. And what I and I think it was the
thing that was missing visually for me on this particular image is that the the canvas awnings don't have that same sort of craft that the rest of the building is really uh the ambitions of the rest of the building. And the thing about the meat
packing district and those really amazing metal canopies, it finishes off those uh openings in a really, you know, beautiful way, which I think if you're going to, you know, play with the detailing of the masonry and the metal,
I think it'll really allow those entries to be very unique and special. >> And can I ask one question? Have you guys ever looked what is there anything particularly is is the 55 lands down the office entry
lobby. That's right. >> But the the commentary about that style I think what we're hearing is that that style of >> overhang is or canopy marquee is is desirable. We love that like in the metal that the base could be pretty >> and and taking an approach that's not
maybe fabricing bass but has you know something more industrial more robust. We I think that that's extremely well taken commentary. So we we appreciate that. >> Definitely. >> All right. Great. Um Seth I think we're
ready to shift over to public comment. >> Great. So, as a reminder that starting January 1st, 2026, the commission will limit live public commentary to the project's introduction. Members of the public interested in submitting comments to the commission are encouraged to do
so in writing by emailing them to bcdcboston.gov at any phase of the project's review. However, until that time, we will continue to take live public commentary. So, at this time, we invite any members of the public in attendance who wish to contribute public comments to raise your
digital hand and staff will call on you. If you are calling in by phone, dial star 9 to activate the raised hand cuff and star six to mute unmute yourself. Please state your name and any relevant project affiliation information and please keep promise to two minutes. Uh
and Allison Fulpinas, I see your hand raised and you unmute yourself. >> Yes. Hi, thank you. Um and you already identified me, so that's great. Um I um
I've spoken about the building before but um just I I thought that u metaphor of a freighter was very interesting that the size of this and how it's landing on the street um it really is a very large
very long building and I wish it was uh less long shorter because I've been very interested always in the um small historic building at 4347 lands down. The one that has the um uh
souvenir sign outside and wondering again whether it could be saved and this building could be shortened. I think that would be a really uh improvement to the project. I mean the design of this building of course is fascinating but it
is a freighter landing on landsdown. Um and wondering now that you're doing hybrid meetings whether um a model was created for this project. Um I I don't know if there's a standard for uh what
what projects are have to do models or or what but that would have been interesting as well to see. Thank you so much. That's those are my Thank you. >> Thank you, Alison. And just to address the model issue, as this project started
back in June before, we uh uh anticipated coming in person. Uh we, as a matter of fact, had not been requiring physical models for all projects. Um we do sometimes, but did not for this one in particular. And that's something we're evaluating as part of article 80
modernization or submission requirements. >> Thank you. Um, is there any other public comment? Yes. Can I just follow on that one? >> If if you don't mind. Uh, so, uh, seeing no other public hands, I'll close public
commentary and turn it back to the commissioners. It's it's partly a compliment, but it's also I think a little bit of of a relationship to the existing buildings on well on landstone, but all around the park, which I think it's easy to assume that those are first
generation um industrial warehousy sort of looking buildings, but there's a lot of aspiration in that first generation of building, a lot of decoration. So, I really like where you're headed with the articulation in the brick and and the
thinking around that either in the more 19th century traditional warehouse um fashion or something a little bit more um decorative, but I would I would be looking at more of that just to see where you might take that. It's very
restrained as you're presenting it, but I was really delighted to see it. Um, I just think that there's a lot around Fenway right now that it's really quite lovely if it were better maintained. Y >> we we concur. That's part of why we have
the Morris Ame and Jack Gardner team as our architects because they're geniuses at this stuff and we really we really appreciate that and and thought it was a really important skill to bring. >> All right, Kathy, thanks for that comment.
So, we've had a lot of comments. I I don't think that they fit neatly into buckets like our uh last project that we reviewed tonight, but I think you've had a lot of opinions come your way. Um but but I would summarize by saying that I
think that there's kind of a greater consensus um and direction today amongst the commissioners. And so um I think that's always the goal. So, commissioners, I think we are ready
for a motion for this project. >> Okay. Um, I'll make a motion. >> Uh, I would I would make I would make a motion to approve the project on the basis of a couple of refinements that
the proponent work with staff. uh and I may not catch all of them but namely um to uh further refine toward resolution the angled brackets. Um I think looking
at uh a little bit closer one one solution with respect to one tier lower uh than you have. I think continuing to refine the brick detail and which I think we're all excited about. Um certainly acknowledging the comments
that were made by Shauna and Laura with respect to the landscape and the granite blocks and uh >> I was just saying further developing the streetscape in the context of >> the streetscape >> and uh and then the uh the mass pike uh
facade there and seeing if um if the alternative planer version is is acceptable. Um, is there was there anything else? Oh, and then um the the canopy the infrastructure I think a stronger more
baked in from the landlord or owner side infrastructure on the canopy. >> Sorry, Commissioner, just to be clear, these are these are advisory recommendations as we continue to evolve the design, not requirements that we do X or Y. >> That's right. Is that correct? That's
correct. Thank you, Chief. >> I'll second. Great. Thank you, Jonathan. Thank you, Shauna. All in favor, please say I. Jonathan Garland, >> hi. >> Shauna Gilly Smith,
>> I. >> Kathy Kadoras, >> funny. >> Sorry Kathy, I missed that. >> Hi. >> Okay. And Anry Luvenau. I
>> I think David has left. Uh David Nagahiro >> I >> Laura Solano >> I >> Kirk Sykes. >> Hi. >> And myself Linda Eastley. I um so great recommendations and
comments. We look forward to seeing how it progresses. Thank you. >> Thank you all very very much. Happy holidays everyone. >> Thank you. you as well. >> And thank thank you to the proponent and thank you to staff and commissioners for
bearing with us today in our fire drill and for sticking it out for this extra long time. I think we learn something new every time in these hybrid meetings uh as we continue to refine our operations and I think part of the start of that was this sort of hybrid meeting
participation guide that we sent out and would ask folks to take a look at that so that we can you know get your input as we refine these systems to make for as efficient uh but also as substantive uh and effective meetings as possible. uh particularly as we have roadmaped
these meetings to to overall less meetings than we had before uh introductions and uh conclusion meetings uh still need to have a certain amount of substance to them. So thank you for your patience as we work through both the logistics and figuring out how to h enhance the content aspect of these
meetings. >> Yeah. and definitely welcome the suggestion and I think we have that as a as a potential agenda item for for next month when I know we do have a full slate of affordable projects looking to get in uh at the end of the year. So we
have that to look forward to next month. >> No, no, Steve, go ahead. We finish this meeting and then I'll say what I >> Yeah, I think I think we just need to have a vote of adjournment. So um all in favor of closing out the meeting, please say I. Jonathan Garland.
>> Hi >> Shauna Smith. >> Kathy Karina. >> Hi >> Jen Marie Lino. >> I >> David Nagahiro. >> Hi >> Mar Solano. >> I >> Kirk Sykes. >> Hi.
>> And myself I. The meeting is adjourned. Great to see everybody. >> Good night everyone. Safe travels and good weather. Okay.