Good evening. Good evening, folks. We'll just give it another second to make sure we've got everybody in. And as I start the preamble,
Cyrus will work on elevating folks. So, good evening everybody >> and thank you. >> Sorry. Are folks getting feedback from me? >> I think David, you might David Carlson might have two windows up. There we go.
>> Okay, start again. Good evening everyone and thank you all for joining us for the May 19th design subcommittee of the Boston Civic Design Commission. My name is Seth Riseman, deputy director of design review and executive director of BCDC at the City of Boston Planning Department.
Today's subcommittee will address the proposed project at 45 Towns and Street in Roxbury. I am joined by Cyrus Miselli, newly minted special assistant for design review initiatives, who will be stepping into the role of executive secretary for BCDC, as well as other
members of the planning department staff. Actually, no, there are no other members of the planning department staff. So, it's just the two of us for now. >> June's here. >> I think June's here. >> Oh, June is here. Thank you. Thank you, June, for joining. Um, the planning department continues hosting public meetings in a virtual
setting for the health, safety, and accessibility of Boston residents. Before we proceed with the agenda, I'm required by the open meeting law to notify the public that this meeting is being recorded. Please turn off your camera and microphone if you do not wish to be recorded. And as a reminder that as of January
1st, 2026, BCDC no longer accepts live public testimony at design subcommittee meetings. Live public testimony is taken only at a project's introduction. and therefore we will not be taking any live public testimony tonight. Members of the public who wish to submit comments are encouraged to do so in writing by
emailing them to bcdcboston.gov at any phase of the project's review. Comments will be sent to the commissioners before the next scheduled meeting on a specific project. And a reminder to all in attendance that the proponent's presentation will be posted to the project's planning department web
page and a recording of tonight's proceeding will be posted to the city of Boston's YouTube channel page. These should be posted by the end of the week. And that is a long preamble. For the record, the following commissioners are present. Uh Linda Eley, Jonathan Garland, Mimi Love, David
Nagahiro, Laura Solano, and Kirk Sykes. I don't think I missed anyone. Uh if any additional commissioners join, we will read their names into the record. And onto the proposed project. 45 Towns and Street in Roxberry seeking article 80B
entitlement includes approximately 211,000 square feet of primarily residential uses 164 units in a combination of adaptively reused and newly constructed buildings 137ish I think vehicular parking spaces and
approximately 16,000 ft of new and improved open space on a 4.85 85acre site previously occupied by the Radius Special Hospital and before that by the Jewish Memorial Hospital and Rehabilitation Center. The proposed project has been developed in compliance
with the underlying zoning of the site. This will be the project's second presentation to the commission and the first design review subcommittee following its introduction at the April 7th, 2026 monthly meeting. Consistent with article 80 and BCDC reform efforts, the planning department is applying
meeting limits intended to align the review timelines of city departments and the commission. The project at 45 towns and street has been roadmapped for a threemeating review. As always, in order to make the most of each meeting that a project is before the commission, I'd like to encourage the commissioners to
be clear, specific, and comprehensive with their feedback and recommendations on information requests, area areas of concerns, suggested design changes, and areas for refinement. After tonight, planning department staff will continue to work with the project team to ensure the commission's feedback
is heard and incorporated prior to the project's return to the commission. Pending any questions from the commissioners? I would like to invite the proponent to share their screen and begin their presentation. So I think folks are elevated on the
proponent team to begin sharing. And a reminder that you have a maximum of 20 minutes to present. We'll give you a halftime and a one or two minute warning. And who do we have sharing their screen
tonight? Steve, you able to share? >> Stephen. Yep. Go ahead, Steve. We'll pull it up. >> Steve, also you're muted. >> Everybody see the presentation? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. But we're in slideshow viewer mode
where it's not full screen. We're seeing your uh notes. >> Okay. Probably uh I I shared the wrong screen. I'm sorry. You all will have to tell me at some point if David Carlson gave as long preamles as as I just gave.
>> So, how are we doing with that now? Are we good >> longer? longer I think. >> If I remember correctly. >> Hi David. >> So yes, >> I think uh we're good to go.
>> Okay, Teddy, you want to just start? >> Yeah. So I just wanted to kind of lay out um kind of the basis of this project. So we started this project back in 2015 uh with the intention of devel tearing down the existing property and
redeveloping it. Uh during that arch lady process uh we received a lot of feedback uh from the community and we took that feedback and uh came back with a revised design concept. Um ultimately you know the project has to work
financially. Uh so we're limited by high construction costs, uh market rents in this area, as well as a commitment to 13% affordable housing on site. Um the community wanted a zoning compliant project. Uh they wanted one to one parking. Uh that's not what we're proposing, but we did fit as much
parking as we possibly can at this point. Um they want us to minimize construction impact on neighbors. Uh essentially they want they don't want any blasting. Uh the site is full of Roxberry pudding stone. Uh so this adaptive re use really limits that if
not entirely eliminates it. Uh our KIC has a goal of sustainable construction practices. Uh we had a goal of adding green space, reducing impervious area um and putting in energy efficient systems. Uh and there's really nothing nothing more efficient than reusing an existing
building. Um LA uh lastly uh when it came to the adaptive reuse uh we were trying to maintain the original architectural concepts as much as possible. Um understand the time of construction of each building as well as
um visually separating each building. Um and really the neighborhood asked for a more residential feel. Uh we are in the middle of a residential neighborhood. Uh this is a commercial or institutional building. So, we tried really hard to turn it into what feels and looks like a
residential place of living. Um, and with that, Steve, I'll hand it off to you. >> Thanks, Dad. Um, so I'd like to begin the presentation with just discussing um what we heard at the previous um um meeting. We the um
commissioners kind of told us that we needed to have a clear communication. uh there was confusion about uh understanding the existing conditions of the of the site and so we I think we um we'll show some uh additional ways to kind of understand the site. It is a very complex site. Um you know they
wanted to make sure that we really reinforce the identity shift required between the institutional hospital and the residences. Um they they suggested maybe a way to do that would be using to break down the massing of the building and and rather than treat it as all one building but maybe kind of look at the
ways it interacts with the site and individual buildings might be able to be introduced that way. Um and and by doing that how does the the site and the the grade inter interact with the building? Um that was a really important piece of what they wanted us to discuss and um
and you know in doing so how do we improve their circulation and how do we make sure that it's fairly legible how you get around the site and you know primarily also we want to make sure that we are really addressing how tons and street um introduce you know interacts with the building how do how do we how
do we create the street edge along towns and street um we have this video here that I'm going to play that gives you a pretty good understanding of I probably gives the best understanding of this of this complex site. Oh, I don't know why it
didn't play. Hold on one second. There we go. Um, you can see the main building is very institutional. It is functionally designed for hospital use. Um, prior parking was really prioritized and there's a vast extensive asphalt that we're going to have to contend with. Um, in the rear of the building, you can see as it's cutting over right
here, this is there's a there's a lot of ledge that that's kind of introduced in the rear of the building. Um on both sides of the primary building, we have some very steep slopes. Um from the street all the way up to the rear of the rear of the site. Um all the building
entries are primarily inside the lot. The buildings do not really address the street on a pedestrian scale. And and overall the building itself just doesn't really fit in this with the scale of the neighborhood. Um to summarize what you can see what we saw in the video, you can see the steep
slopings up from the um from the the street. We have 12% 11% slopes coming up from the street. Um that's very difficult to traverse, especially for handicap accessibility. Um the highest point averages roughly 62 feet above the street. So you can really understand how how how much um of a grade difference
there is between the two. Um and there but there are some relatively flat areas separated by steep slopes and even and even the steeper like uh ledge area but you know we'll we'll use those as positives to as part of the design. Um here's the existing site plan. You
can see the the areas where the biggest slopes are um indicated on the site plan. Um and you know of course the areas there they're flat areas um and then we have an area at the top that is exposed ledge. This area is kind of in a sort of urban wild condition.
um that hasn't really been um touched. Um the and then we have the streetscape area along Towns and Street that has a 30 inch putting stone wall that runs the full length of the site at the sidewalk. Um the primary hospital building cuts
through the site such that a six-story building along Tanza Street becomes only three stories in the rear. Um the site slopes meet the building levels of strategic locations for the design. Uh there's been a hospital on the site since 1930s. Um and in the 50s and 60s, much of it
was replaced by new construction. In the 80s, the last addition was built. Um the note that the C building was built first, but the original main facade was replaced by the A building. Um the B building is a dormatory for nurses who worked in the hospital. Um the white two-story warehouse in the back was
built in the 60s and modified in the 80s and it's in bad shape and that's that's going to be removed as an organizational principle for the design for uh during this presentation. We're going to in order to discuss the design, we'll use these letter designations throughout the presentation. There's a quick tour along the existing
conditions along Towns and Street. Uh note the putting stone wall along the the the sidewalk. Um here you can see that the two primary buildings along the street, the A and the B building. uh then working to the B building being that dorm building. Uh Town Street's a one-way street and
this we're p traveling along the street in the in the direction of the travel of the vehicle's travel and and and by that respect you'd be looking over your your right shoulder here to see this facade. But this is also you know primary visible visibility site as you're coming from the the
middle part of the the neighborhood. Um this is the updated building layout on the site. Uh first I just want to indicate the areas that we're going to demo um on the site. Um there's some one-story buildings and a that that warehouse that we discussed recently.
Um and here we're going to the pieces we're adding to the building. It's the largest of which is the three-story addition to the dorm building, but there's also areas where we're adding an infill story such that the areas align with the adjacent building. Each building interacts with the site differently at various tiers of the site
and as the grade gets higher until it meets the rear of the building. Um the street tier aligns with interacts with the first level building level at buildings A and B and the the lower tier interacts with the second level of the building. And there's a middle tier that that uses
the relatively flat area of the site that interacts with the building with building D at the uh building's third level. And lastly, there's an upper upper tier where the new addition um of the dorm building has a a stair and an elevator that go up to an accessible pedestrian bridge that connects to a
walkway that brings residents to the gathering space at the upper tier of the site. So, an overall overview of the project site include um some primary site amenities that we've introduced. Um in the south, we have a community garden. Um up in the north we're we're having a
uh a dog a shaded dog park under the existing tree canopy. Um in the west we have this lookout deck that's at the highest point of the site. Um in the middle of the site we've introduced some gardens that kind of work around a new pavilion building that we have in that area. Um there's also um
parks that we're going to introduce along the um Thompson Street uh streetscape in the south parking lot. We've added new tiered parking to mitigate the difficult parking that's on that in that area that has a 12% slope. The primary building designs along the
town street um with the front facades of building A and B. Note the extent of the existing material building materials slated to remain. Um we're trying to reuse much of the masonry as we can. Um we manipulated some existing buildings to create large windows um to allow more
light into the residences. This is the south facade of the of the primary building. Um along that tiered parking area we talked about. Um and you can see that this is also the primary facade and entry for what we're considering building C. Um once again
we're able to maintain a good portion of the existing masonry in those areas. Uh and then the north side, the kind of the opposite side of that building along the um the second area, the other other entrance um drive into the building up to that level uh area.
And we had the new south facade of the um of the dorm edition um that we're considering that the the E building. Um and then here we have the north facade. Um and on this facade you can kind of note the the stair tower and
the pedestrian bridge on the right of the bu on the facade. So the building street interface at um tier one and the street level entry at the primary building. Um the existing building has a simple but interesting designs with horizontal windows with a kind of reddish brick that appears to be
woven or interlaced behind the primary bricks. It's kind of a simple design but has some complexity to it that we we're going to take advantage of in our design. Um so for the building we utilize the existing architecture of the interface linear window grid we created and we created a new design that uses
the primary facade organization to provide larger windows for the residents. Um the lowest level is modified to create a more human scale that relates to the scale of the other buildings on the street. Uh we worked this we worked this lower sight tier by excavating down to align with the lowest level of the building to create a park
with a lawn area accessible from the neighborhood along the sidewalk. Um this this excavation the lower tier of the building also aligns with the lowest part of the sidewalk at on uh at this part of the building. Um so by excavating this down we kind of created a sort of front porch for the for the
complex that um it's kind of how we're we're kind of looking at it. There's a there's a um we're going to allow a lot of residential community engagement in this in this area because of the access from the sidewalk as well as access from the building. >> And Steve, you're about halfway.
>> Okay. Street trees are in line with the existing wall in a way that kind of erodess a barrier to engage the site with with the street. we um we didn't have quite enough room to initiate and use the Boston street trees um
methodology for doing street trees um Boston sorry um here's a view of the new building entrance and it relation to the new the new park area and with the with the trees removed for clarity the design of the lower two tiers of building with the new human
scale condition is visible um we can create we created a sort of portico to provide a small level of privacy seat of the units that open to this park while also introducing a trellis area that is separated from the park for the residents to sit. Um the entrance prominade will utilize
salvage brick from the building to create a new walkway from the sidewalk to the entrance. Um there's not enough sidewalk width to comply with that Boston Street complete street initiative I was talking about. Here you can see how we created a unique system where the new trees are planted within the existing putting stone wall. Um this begins to show the ways that we eroding
the wall but not eliminating this touch down touchstone of uh Roxberry identity along Towns Street as a way to open the site to the street. Um the entrance is integrated with the existing pedestrian bridge to create a very prominent entrance with you know
that identifies the the the property. Um at the site entrance road next to the entry um we are creating a treeine prominade to creates a more residential feel to the site. The other building along street has
window and brick panels between express vertical structural elements. Um the ground floor of this building averages 7 ft above the sidewalk. We're maintaining the existing building system by introducing floor to ceiling windows at the existing locations as well as large picture windows in the
middle of the resident's living areas. We've introduced similar porticos and trellising um seating areas for the residents at this at the lowest level of the building. This area affords some privacy from the street by it location 7 ft above the sidewalk. At the street, we've introduced a garden area that works with our approach to
eroding the wall and inviting the public in in off of the sidewalk. Once again, uh the street trees are integrated with the existing wall. Um and we've introduced an accessible ramp to because the building is not accessible from the sidewalk. This view has the trees removed to show
the entrance portico with the uh the trellus, the street trees is what I'm talking about. The the hope is to continue to use the new pudding stone at the new retaining walls throughout the site, but if it can't be sourced, we'll be introducing a material that is compatible. And here's a aerial view of um the
building B um with the trees removed to more clearly show the park with the visitor bike parking and the ramp. Uh onto building C. The facade of building C has elements that are reflected in building A, but what was once the side of the building now acts
as the front of of the of building C. It shares a visual connection with the side of the building with building A but is separated by a singlestory connector. Uh the existing site condition here is a sea of asphalt on a very steep slope that makes parking hazardous.
So now building C now you know as we the the new work we've done here building C is now one one level removed from the street and interacts with the lower tier of the site to improve the parking condition on the side of the building. Tiered parking has been created. This tier is primarily used for access accessible parking. The tier that you
see here at the on the in the rendering uh being more removed from the street, this tier has less direct interaction with the neighborhood, but there still has an important need to provide a connection here. The entrance at this location leads to many of the residents amenities, but also leads to a community rooms that can be used by the neighbor neighborhood residents. This also at
this stair is a dedicated parking for car share vehicles that are available to the neighborhood residents. Um here's just a view of the entrance looking back at the overall building. Um, more views of the building. Note the glazed base of this building that indicates the more public aspect of this
part of the complex. The access in the street is via a ramp and stair system um that at once again erodess the but maintains a putting stone wall along the sidewalk. Uh the ramp and stair heavily landscape to create a more inviting
connection between the street and the site's lower tier. At the middle tier of the site where we have a relatively flat area, we have the more utilitarian parts of the existing hospital. Uh, a series of one-story building elements containing bully rooms and other hospital functions that will not be needed will be removed. Much of
the architecture here was built in a different era than the than the original and so it's not much of an attempt and not much of an attempt was made um to blend with the rest of of the existing architecture. We removed part of this of the existing wing that sticks off the main part of
the building. Um it was a little unwieldy in its width for residential use. Um at this location, we're able to create a pavilion that interacts with the new garden via the third level of the of the building. Um the entries at this location at the glazed base lead to a lounge and gathering area that can be
utilized the inside and outside of the site at once. From this garden area, uh a path leads to a shaded dog park utilizing the existing tree canopy. You can see how the pavilion's lowered level really interacts with the garden. The rear of the building D spans two
building levels. The entrance at level three leads to a ramp system that brings people up to a site tier that aligns with level four of the building. This leads to a community garden area. Um the site for building E is a flat
parking lot that aligns with the third level of the building. Um the warehouse building will remove um further expanding the available flat area at this tier. Um the addition spans the parking lot and allows for parking underneath as well as access to the parking on both
sides of the addition. Um the stair tower on the west end of the building leads to the bridge that provides access to the gathering lookout deck at the highest point of the property. Uh the lookout affords clear views of the downtown Boston skyline. And here's a view of the north facade
of that addition. And just another view of that. And that's the end of my presentation. Thank you very much. >> With two minutes to spare. >> I love it. >> And I'll turn it over to the
commissioners. Thank you, >> commissioners. We're a small enough group can certainly raise our hands or uh unmute yourself. Um don't feel like I have to call on you to
get us going in conversation, but maybe we should at least go to a beginning a site plan. Maybe you could just start us there, Stephen. I think that would be helpful. >> Yep. Um, not don't exactly recall what slide that was, but I'm gonna take a
guess and then I'll go from there. >> And Mimi, I'm happy to jump in as well. >> Go right ahead, Linda. That's great. >> Thank you. I uh I wasn't there for the April 7th presentation, but I've had a chance to look at these slides ahead of
today's meeting, and this is a really tricky site, and I just wanted to compliment your team on helping us to understand how the topography really walks up the site both sectionally and
also in terms of um some of the views. So, that was that was really helpful and appreciate that. I wanted to talk uh just about a couple of different things. I think overall the idea of you know reusing this
hospital, creating a new neighborhood, creating an identity on towns and street all make a lot of sense to me. um choosing, you know, which portions of the buildings you're keeping and removing others and then adding that
larger addition off the former nurses dormatory. Um also makes a lot of sense to me. I think that one of the trickiest pieces is really the entry sequences to these various buildings.
And I wanted to call out just a few examples and you know think about ways that those entries could get even stronger and then also wanted to talk just about an overall concern for the
kind of open space vision. So maybe we'll start with the entries. So, one of the um most successful entries I actually think is the is really the announcement or almost a marquee which
is using the existing bridge that connects A and B. Maybe we can just go to one of those images. Sure, this one works. So, normally uh I think as a commission we don't support these types of connections. This one is
on site already. And in this case where the site is so complex and you have so many different buildings and architectural forms coming together, I actually think that it helps to really strengthen the entry to the site as a
whole. and the way that you've done it, I think is um is quite elegant. But this image also describes uh an area that I'm concerned about. And so if you're looking at building A on this slide, it's on that left hand side, you've
created this really interesting foyer for that building for the entry that's a little bit further down to the left. But this entry itself feels very constrained and tight and um I don't know if it will officially say entrance above it, but
the stair coming down from that main sidewalk just makes it feel um rather cramped. And so I I think that the entry sequence to building a needs a little bit more improvement. And I love the idea that you're creating that foyer for the public, for the residents, but it
feels a little bit um disjointed right now, tight in some places, and I don't know that there's a clarity around where um folks actually enter the building. for building B. If we can toggle between
slides 37 and 38. So, I wanted to just have you help us understand where the entry to this building is. So, on this one, on slide 38, we're looking at what looks like two doorways with addresses of 101 and 102.
And if you go back one slide, um I'm trying to understand whether the canopy that we're seeing here is a main entry or not. And also given that the bays of building B are so
vertical, um this canopy seems to be working against kind of that verticality and that notion and in some ways also seems to be interrupting um another pretty compartmentalized series of garden spaces. And so as with
building A, I just wonder if there's a way to simplify the garden spaces so that they are they have more clarity, maybe some larger spaces while also addressing the circulation pattern. And then thinking about the entry to this
building in general. And then if we can go um to one of the building C images. This entry entry is probably the most complex and I appreciate you looking at ways to
um allow a pedestrian coming from towns in to actually access the entry up those grades. So really the foyer here is about ramps um rather than open space. And so for me it just feels like the open space itself
is somewhat residual. And I wonder if there could be an expression of open space through which a ramp connects the dots street to entry. Um and understanding that your parking is taking up a lot of
the you know traditional foyer of this building. My other question was you know can you actually enter building A and get to C? Yes. Yes, you can. >> Okay. You just have to go up through the building in order to do that.
>> Yeah. You go you go by the concierge and then you go down the hallway to the elevator and that can take you up to this level. So, they are Yeah, there is a connection between the two. >> Okay, great. And then my last comment um and something I would love for you to work on is I actually think the open space on what I'm going to call the kind
of parking court side of the building. So really as the buildings are framing that parking court in the middle of the site that to me seems like it has the most potential and again like other
parts of of the landscape vision it just feels and we can go to one of those slides if you don't mind. Um to me it just feels like uh it's hard to understand what that open space vision is. Even though when you look at it even in plan view, you
know, there's a very large this is a great image. Um there's a there's huge potential for really thinking about okay what what are we doing with a parking court and what is that open space concept and how do the buildings become connected within that main um parking
court space and then where are these special spaces maybe as they branch out the deck which you can get to from the building you know the dog park etc. So, so again, it feels like a a lot of a lot of spaces that aren't quite connected
just yet. So, for me, strengthening the entries through some of the examples um we just shared and also strengthening the open space vision would be two areas that I'd love to see additional work done on um between now and when we see
you again. Thank you. >> Thanks, Linda. Kirk Sykes. Uh yeah. Yep. Thank you. Um so I everybody will tell you this is incredibly tricky because it is. Um and
and I think part of what I would hope you might take a look at is some of the context in terms of the surrounding buildings. Um, so if I'm thinking uh macro to micro public realm, um,
macro, my first comment is about taking a look at your context and figuring out how your building fits in with that because it's so institutional, it's so large, it's so much bigger than the context, it really requires
uh a very thoughtful intervention that I know you're trying to do. Um, and I think what you may find is a vocabulary of bays and bows and some more detailed uh massing articulation
that isn't quite showing up yet in terms of the way your building presents itself to the community. And I could almost imagine uh that that could be created with uh both Juliet or regular balconies because I think some volutric disruption
of the massing is what's this what this is missing not not as much an applique of of a vert because when you add a four-story column it or four it's still a very institutional feel and so I I would just ask you to take a look at
that context. The other uh macro comment that I had made the last time this was here was about the interface between the entry and towns and street and mostly about traffic calming on Townsen because cars come off of Washington at Mach 9
and and your people are edging their noses out into a very very fast throughway. And I don't know if I think taking the wall down is a good start because it increases sight lines. I think it may be some signage. It may be
some other cues of what's about to happen because that uh perpendicular intersection or interface I think still has the potential to be a real real challenge. The last comment I would make is your new building is quite interesting and
one of the things you said that I I thought I heard very clearly was how amazing the views to downtown are. And so while there is a an inordinate amount of beautiful egrade uh amenity space, I wonder if there isn't an opportunity to
even create a more dynamic presence on the roof of that building even for a portion of it as a way to sort of signal new different hip you know sort of kind of place. Uh so those are my comments and uh thank you.
Thanks Kirk Jonathan. >> Uh thanks Mimi um and thanks to the proponent. Um I agree with uh comments so far is that this is a very complex uh challenge and so I do commend you on uh
seeing an improvement from the last goround. Um, but I would say a couple of my comments definitely uh second what Kurt brought up about I would say some of the some of the just broader multifamily residential cues that I
think the the architecture still needs to express. Um during the presentation I I sort of was on Google Maps a little bit and sort of put put the street view on just to kind of get myself in the neighborhood and sort of do that cross
comparison between like this larger institutional building and the smaller two threetory scale you know residential um you know fabric that that's around. And I I think and I can't quite tell on some of your images how far you're able
to go with working on the windows and the fenistration. I know that there probably are some constraints with structure and budget and how much you can erode the facade. But I would definitely encourage you to look at window proportions uh because there's just something here in the number of
images. You can go to slide 38 uh or 40 somewhere in there. 38 40 41. Um where the the windows are another big those are going to be a big feature where they just seem
grossly out of scale with those other residences around. And that's really the challenge is that you have a big building. And so I think what almost exacerbates the size of the building is now how large the windows are. And if there can be other residential cues,
maybe there could be, like Kurt said, some Julietes or some other depth or some other residential cues that really help tune this more toward a residential building and less of a institutional building. Uh, and I think a lot of that
has to do with just window proportions. Um, sills of windows. It looks in a lot of cases like the the windows are coming right down to the floor. So, just trying to look at those. Um, and I also think and I I wonder I mean a lot of this is just clad. The whole campus is clad in
like a a buff colored brick. Um, I wonder if you you've uh thought about like maybe staining the brick in certain cases. I know that that's certainly doable on buildings that exist, but that may offer the ability to create uh more
visually distinct masses so that it's not just this one campus approach. Again, trying to move it away from an institutional campus to an eclectic collection of residential buildings. Perhaps staining the brick. You know, a couple of complimentary colors might
help uh break it down and and also just create some identity for for the neighborhood. Um, you know, operability in the windows, I think, would also be another lever that you can pull on where, you know, when you think about residential, you're like, "Oh, where are the casement windows? Where are the
awning windows?" So that additional layer in the window frame uh adding that uh could be helpful. Um I think that's that's generally where I am. I definitely concur with the on the site plan. I'm I'm also kind of
missing the the big idea on the landscape. I I do commend you on kind of the menu of items that you talked about, the shadow dog park and and the the overlook and spaces like that, but um
how to really maximize open space that's against the building, you know, where where the residents feel like there's a direct engagement with indooroutdoor and what is the what is the really big concept about the open space? I'm still kind of missing that, but thank you for the uh work that you put in this this
time. Maybe I can follow up on that, Jonathan, because I I want to I know we're going to spend a lot of time on the open space and I'm imagining Laura's building up um her comments, but if we could just spend
a few minutes talking about slides 29 through 33 cuz I I really want to understand the materiality and composition of these elevations. And by the way, just Oh, did I say TW? I'm looking at an old presentation. It's of the elevations,
the straight up 2D elevations. We can go to the beginning of these. And I will just say that you have done a tremendous amount of work. I don't want to be dismissive of that. So, congrats. I do think that you've done more extracting
and understanding the building than doing additions, which is really quite a change from the last time we saw. Also, I think this is all moving in the good direction, but I I really want to echo what Linda was saying about the entries.
I I believe that the entrance to building B is over here along the side and not here, you know, where where we were seeing doors. um the canopies that you have along both
building A and building B. In fact, right above where their little, you know, label is, I think those are actually working against calling the entries. It they they would probably be nice features in in these park designs, but they're trying to create a little
bit of symmetry that's detracting from the entry points of your buildings. And I really just wonder if if this is where you want to really focus on, you know, some elements that call out entries because I
think the entry points are getting lost with these other pergola moments and if there's a consistency to the material approach at entries that might want to be considered um to just to help
identify them. I also, if you go, I don't want to actually have you go to the rendering, but I believe the rendering was showing some kind of shiplap or some kind of material that didn't seem in keeping with brick above. I I would like to just have you think
about what that material would be. It feels like some kind of either darker brick. I like the coloration. I think it's very handsome, but I feel like that wood underneath brick, it's kind of like a p, you know, a a paper scissor rock thing. I just feel it doesn't feel like
the right materiality under brick. Um, and so if you could think about it in either like a stark um, you know, uh, obsidian brick or maybe there's perhaps like some kind of you know tile that you
can look at that a masonry product I think would be more uh, in keeping with the right materiality. And then just leaping off of what Jonathan was saying in terms of variety, I I do think there's a I'm a little bit worried about
when you drop the window sills here, you're introducing a material that I'm not sure what that is in these locations. And I think the rhythm of the brick weaving through, as you described, is a really
strong architectural element. It would be great to see it as brick. I just don't know what the intent is. So maybe that's just a question that I have for you. Um and then to go along with that, maybe
all the window mullions don't have to be the same color. Like maybe they're, you know, a little bit, you know, lighter in one approach, like a champagne color versus a black color. Just continue with this idea of giving each of the buildings an identity.
So maybe if we go to the next slide, I kind of have gotten lost as to what's a new addition and what is an existing piece. I I know that building A and building C are more or less um existing pieces. I do think that these windows
and you know this bay are are new and I think that all is is relatively working with the some scale modifications and you know distinct features per building. I think some of the things that you're starting to introduce here like these overhangs I
thought was a really nice detail. Um I agree with Jonathan that thinking about the next the type of windows would go a long way. I'm I'm not sure what this is really referencing. I don't know if the center is a bottom, you know, hopper or
what that is, but it feels like casements would be really handsome in this composition as a window type. And then the ribbon window in building D is one where I feel maybe this is a good place to do an addition because that
ribbon window just makes it seem less residential and more institutional. I I do think that that's an area where you could look at improving. But I'm assuming that this section here is a new piece.
>> It is. >> Yes. >> And so maybe the variety is interesting. I I don't know that it has it it really stands out as different. And so all of your other buildings are pretty consistent on what's happening on every
floor, right? This one just happens to have a moment at the top that I don't know is necessary to the composition of that one piece. That's that stood out to me as unique and I'm questioning if it's
needed. But I think you know you're I think you're getting a sense I think another level of refinement of thinking about these elevations. I really think that the interior elevation on the next slide.
That one compositionally is really challenging to me. So I would just take some of the comments you heard and think about you know what are the windows? Are there balconies or features that could be added? Can it be simplified? Does it
have to be this complex? Um, >> can I um >> I think should should go, but I there was a there's a number of things that you just said, Mim. I'm I'm so glad you brought up the elevations because it
really does help distill some of this in a big way. And and on this particular slide, you know, this area here to me that feels residential, if that helps. And
it's and it's in in my mind, it's about like, you know, this I can sort of telegraph what's happening. That's probably a living room. That's probably a bedroom. It just has that and and you can understand like somebody can furnish below the window and sort of there's a floor in there somewhere. It it starts
to get lost when you go back a slide perhaps and you and you're into this, you know, now it's not feeling residential. my my head is in a completely different, you know, and so it's going to be I think it's going to require a very disciplined approach to
even say maybe some of this could be infilled with solid wall >> and that would get you back to a more understandable window ratio that when people look at this they understand people live here. I think that's the biggest challenge with with the entire
array of you pro there's probably 10 to 12 window typologies across this campus and some of that's you're inheriting which we understand but maybe look at where some things can be infilled and where you can reinforce what is
residential and diminish what is not kind of thing. >> Yeah, I think that was helpful. I know I'm going to pass it on to Laura. I will I will say that the just one last comment. Um if we go back to the one elevation we didn't look at of new
building E, I think before we really talk about the architecture, you know, I think there's something that's very confused with confusing for me to have this, you know, a bridge type building
with parking underneath and then the tower at the end. And I I don't know that compositionally it we should be talking about what the architecture looks like, but I definitely think in the planning there
is some awkwardness that I hope Laura has the right answer for. >> No pressure. >> I'm gonna pass it to you, Laura. >> All righty. Could we go to a site plan? I think there was one late in the um
presentation that kind of summed it all up. >> You want the overall site plan? >> Yeah, if you could. There you go. So, first of all, I don't think we've seen a harder site
in the time that I've been on um the commission, which is a little over three years. This is a tough site and the building like there everything about this is tough. And so I deeply appreciate that
you listened to what our confusion was last time and you put a lot of muscle into thinking about the outdoor spaces. I c I can see that and the perspectives are are deeply helpful. And what I've
concluded, let me grab a pen. What I've concluded is that you've kind of taken the tact of every building kind of has some parking related with it. Right? So you have
these room rooms of parking. I'll say more than rooms of of garden. And it's also obvious that you have to have Well, before I go there,
one thing that I think would really really help us to understand is I see you have the the orange dots for for entrances to the building, right? Am I reading that right? >> That's correct.
>> Yep. It would help us if we understood what the elevation of that is relative to the I'll call it court that's right outside of it. You can see that in the um some of the perspectives but not all
of them. And then what is happening at that ground floor level. So, for instance, I think it was C, you said that, oh, the basement's now revealed. And I don't know if you mean that the basement is a different room or it's
become housing or um or whatever. But really understanding what is happening with all of these, that's one thing that I think would help. The other
is whose parking belongs where? I mean, is this a a kind of a freeforall or are you expected? For instance, if you live here,
where's your parking? Is it here or is it here? What like what's the what's the thought about that? Is there an association between the parking and the buildings themselves?
>> Well, we don't have a onetoone parking like a one unit per um parking spot. So, because of that, there isn't really it is in in essence a little bit of a free-for-all because there is there is um not a parking per unit per se. Um but
yes I mean primarily what we we we are using some of the existing parking because to create new parking on the site with the with the the site limitations that we have it's a little bit difficult. So in a way we are we are at the mercy of what exist existing there a little bit and so um I
understand your your point but in a way it's it's it's kind of um difficult to I don't know to to um >> well >> kind of indicate where each parking lot goes to which building and a good example would be would be for building E
for example that parking at building E and B that's primarily the parking for that building if you lived in those buildings you would go to that parking lot >> um and then realistically the other building just takes up the remainder of the parking. I think Stephen that's still a good exercise to do and you are
going to find out that there are some spaces that aren't clearly associated with that but you know how many how many you know build how many units there are in each of these buildings and I I think
that starts to think about the relationships of the landscape as well. I understand you cannot do one for one and number the spaces and assign. That's really not what I'm talking about. I'm
I'm talking about trying to have the parking help with the organization of the site right now. All the parking is just in wherever it can go. and you've done it probably as you know fairly
graceful for the am the quantity of parking that you have. Um I wanted to ask you something. I saw in the brief that there were 15 additional spaces added. I understood the five I think it
was five or six for commuting. What are those 15 spaces? Last time it was 124 and now it's 130 something. Yeah. So, I'll chime in here. If I miss anything, Steve, you can take over. So,
uh the community really is concerned about parking. That is 100% their largest and biggest issue with this with this development. Uh Towns and Street, I guess, gets very congested at night when all the residents come home. So, they
have really pushed for onetoone parking on this site. >> Um >> we initially >> I remember reading that. >> Yeah. So, we initially came back with one parking. Uh, then we cut it back to 75. Um, and then now we've added again back
15 spots. And really all we did is we took out some of the we infilled some of the when we went from one to one to 0 75, we just infilled some of the spots with trees um with tree bays. And we also um where the shaded dog park area
is. Um that dog park and there was initially a kind of a garden over there that north of building E. Um there was a park on that upper those upper tent spots, parking spots that that was a kind of a garden area that has now been
infilled with parking. >> So that's why the dog park got pushed into the canopy. Um because uh we they really we don't have a whole lot of other room to fit to fit parking. >> Yeah. And then it's also obvious that no
matter what you do because of the grading of the site, you have to have walls, right? They're in all of your drawings. And I think next time, let's have those expressed on the ground floor like this. You know, there's there's a
wall here. has to be a wall here. There has to be a wall here. And I think understanding that would be really helpful. And also having sections that go through the buildings out into the
landscape will help to understand the relationship and how much space we're really talking about. So the exercise of looking at elevation,
what's on the what's on the floor of the entry to the building and um what's adjacent to it is I think an important next exercise to try to get
some clarity about this. And I I still say that recognizing that, you know, you have a really hard problem here. And I think that like you've taken it to another level. But I'm wondering
if in assigning cars, you know, conceptually to the buildings, if you also start to look at this diagrammatically for what is the real usable outdoor space for each of these
buildings as well because they by nature of the the topography they do become kind of units, right? You can see that like in particular where you kind of step up the hill here where you have to
and then you know there's one entrance here but I don't understand where the entrance is for this part of D or this part of D. Is it only there? And is this for C or D?
So >> for me kind of organizing that and making sure that we understand that and that you are able to reflect about you know what belongs to who and I I know that sounds kind of funny because
it's these are big buildings with lots of units but you were taking such a fresh look at the buildings that I think that you also have an opportunity to go beyond beyond what most people think about with
apartments and um site, right? People use it differently and and think about sort of the user and how they would be how they would make an association with
the um with the landscape as well. some of these um ramps that feel a little bit um circuitous like I'll say this one in particular off of towns.
Not sure I understand how that works. Maybe just a few grades thrown on there to understand that. Another diagram is how do people move between spaces or don't they? Or is it that you're coming
up with this scheme where there's enough green, enough sitting area for people to go out and therefore except for the lookout deck which is maybe where the you know a congregation area and I really like that idea. I like that idea
of being up really high cuz you know it's it's at 70 and this is at 50 something and this is at 30 something. So even like a section through here to understand how much space we're really
talking about. The good news about this is that if you're in a landscape and you're overlooking another, you know, like parking area that you're your cone of vision really will kind of erase some of that for you.
And so just having those sections and being able to see what those relationships are um I think would help. Um I'm I'm going to I think I have more to say, but I I would love to hear some feedback from um some of the other
commissioners on talked a lot about the buildings. I'd love to hear some thoughts about the landscape more pointedly from the other commissioners if you'll entertain us.
>> I I um you know mention that the e building is really um I don't know there's something that's uncomfortable about it. It seems expensive. We're putting it on columns. It's only two stories. And so I want to challenge a
little bit of the massing. And one diagram that might be helpful is the building additions. And this ultimately goes to a site uh comment um on slide 18. It's my slide 18 that was shared
with us. It has the red the buildings in red. Yeah. I think this is really helpful because I want to understand you know is it is there a possibility and I'm you know just going to throw it out of
having a smaller building it goes to grade and if you're not meeting your unit counts could any of these other buildings that you have here make up for what could potentially be lost I'm not sure it is once you you know go down to
trade because then I think could that help you know start to rationalize some of these parking areas a little bit more. I think traversing under a building and then you have what could potentially uh
be almost like these little, you know, nooks or quads that could create better outdoor space rather than these complex geometries that are starting to be made.
And I wonder if that is there if we could hear some commentary on that. Yeah, there's a lot of slicing and dicing, right? So there's there's actually I think you had a number that's like 116 maybe I'm not remembering that right of
open space, right? Um, so that's acres acres of open space and because of the grade you've had to do these little slices here and there and is there any way to
look at the how the parking is organized or how some of those spa those pieces are pushed together to give more and there's going to be landscape that has no other purpose except to introduce green, >> right? And that's that's okay. That's
right. It's just have we allowed enough for some type of ownership where people can be outside without feeling like they're surrounded by cars. >> Yeah. >> Stephen, I might add too if I could
quickly jump in. Good evening everybody. Ashling Care working with the the Kensington team on this project. Um, part of the consideration here too as it relates to the parking areas is emergency vehicle access and turnaround points which I Steve can share some of the details on. Um, that was an area
worked extensively with the city and city departments, fire department included through the pre-file pre-file process, excuse me. So, um, that is a factor in sort of some of what has evolved here on the site. Uh again Steve can share the specifics on that but as is uh the necessity for this to be
identified as two separate buildings by the inspectional services department. As such each building needs to meet the allocation of parking required uh and unit counts there. Um again that comes from the overall revision this this revised program right as detailed here
in this design and through this supplemental filing which is an as of right project which was very explicitly kind of laid out by the community and impact advisory group the last time around. So I just wanted to add those couple of comments and considerations that have played a large role in how the overall parking and open space program
has evolved. But again Steve if feel free to jump in with some additional detail there if you'd like. Yeah, to piggy back on that, um, we are at the mercy of the zoning bylaw that is dictating this site, um, places where we were talking about where we've we can't really make the buildings taller, that
that new addition can't be taller than the, um, the roof of the dorm building, for example. So, we're limited by height there. Um, but we do need that that tier there for parking. So, the only way to be able to access and put an addition on is to go below the building. It's not maybe not ideal, but it's the it's the
solution that works. uh you know, it's not um maybe not the the best solution, but it's the solution that works. Um you know, and other locations where on this on this slide here where we're adding those third levels, that's we we're maximizing the amount of space that we can we can go up
on the building because if we go any higher than any of those locations, we're going taller, too tall for the zoning, so we can't go anymore. So, we've we've kind of maximized the amount of um space that we can add to the building in order to get to our unit count. Um and and just to kind of
piggyback on um what I said earlier, um for example, there's there's um this parking here, it's actually been sculpted out of the the the grade that's there now. I mean, in order to get that parking in the existing site, it's actually been sculpted into the the the
the ledge that's there. So to manipulate something like that, we would have we would have similar similar conditions that we' be doing other places where we have to sculpt the site with taking out um putting stone to find new locations for site. The the the um hospital before
kind of left us a footprint that we're we're trying to improve, but ultimately this it's that we don't have a lot of opportunity to to um modify that too much without really doing a lot of site manipulation. Um and so and you know and then just to kind of
put a a finishing point on what um Ashton was saying about the um the the turnaround. I mean just in order to get um emergency vehicles deep into the site, we've had to create areas like this right here to allow for there to be to be turnarounds for these things. And
there's another one here for a lot of things. So we're kind of limited by how we can we can adjust those things. I I I do understand the um the the the comments and and and you know I I I do u understand where they're coming
from and we have looked at things like that and it is a struggle that we're we're fighting. I had um one thought about kind of the open space since I I know we're touching on that now and I think you I think you were on to something in your early slide deck and
and uh I just want to build on it for just one second and trying to also address Laura's question to us all. I'm wondering if it's you know are there typologies that would help to make the site more legible?
So, is there a typology that looks at this um kind of streetscape? And I think that's essentially what you called it. And I'm outlining it here in yellow. And that typology is about addressing the
street, making the buildings and building entries very clear and in my mind at least simplifying the landscape. Um, and then is there another typology of open space typology that looks at
what I think could be a really strong courtyard. Understand that this courtyard is going to have parking in it, but it doesn't mean that it can't be kind of beautiful and thoughtful and um and have some kind
of kind of landscape vision that ties it together. Um, and it might also be a way that you're thinking about, well, how do those facades begin to interact with the landscape in a way that feels like there's kind of one entity that these buildings are really surrounding, you
know, you know, an urban piaza of sorts, right? So, how how do we hold that all together? And then maybe there's kind of a third typology, which is these special moments. So, we have a special moment here, we have a special moment here. Um, and then maybe
I will add a fourth. And that's because what's interesting to me is that the south side of the building, which is often where you think of as having these nice kind of sun um moments in the
shoulder seasons don't really have enough a lot going on there. And I wonder if that could be another typology. And those spaces may need to be a lot more intimate, but they would have a interesting dance with a building entry and um kind of tied up against a
facade, but they could be they could have some really um inventive sunpocket type of attributes and uh it might be worth looking into. So, so for me actually thinking about it in this way, thinking about these I don't know how
many did we draw four typologies would help to clarify really what you're trying to do with the landscape and looks at it in terms of directionality and >> who you know what type of urban experience are you addressing and then how do we get a little bit more um kind
of confined and and framed in the middle etc. And then if you apply the the walls over that kind of diagram, Linda, it also helps you to start organizing those. Like these are ones that have
terraces and maybe not enough landscaping as you'd like, but they're ones that kind of sit proud, you know, of >> the piece that's adjacent to it, whatever that is. >> Yeah, I think Ted Oh, >> go ahead. Go ahead, David. Sorry, Laura.
>> Yeah, just to add to that, I think one of the things that might be helpful too is to see the actual plan uh and where your uh cores are in relationship to the entries >> so that you could, you know, I think it's funny, Linda, I was thinking the same thing is that,
>> you know, if the so-called courtyards like the green space that you just outlined could make it feel like a court and oh by the way, you're parking on it and the trees are organized in a way that it felt like a courtyard. And the example I love is uh
on Bow Street and at Harvard um where it's between a church and you feel this kind of uh kind of passageway through the church >> off of Mount Auburn Street. Yes. >> Yeah. It reads as a courtyard and it's treated as if it were a little court,
but oh by the way, you're parking on it. So when the cars aren't there, it just feels like a courtyard. And I think in relationship to some of these facads where you could start to think that you know these could have those kinds of relationships because it seems like this
facade and this facade and the way it's enclosing that space should really have a dialogue and I think that's what Mimi was getting at a little bit so that they the building uh faces had that kind of relationship. Um, you know what I do like and this is again I I kind of
jumped in so I apologize but you know I think you made a tremendous amount of progress since last time and I know that you were talking a lot with the city and uh you know Seth and the rest of the group have probably guided you on a lot of these moves. So I think you know to your credit uh it was pretty significant
difference from last time. You know I think there's kind of this understated simplification that you did to the facades which I I think is very nice. Um I do think that there could be a few more cues to it feeling a little bit more domestic and residential as you
know Jonathan and others had mentioned. I think on uh Towns and Street the um the canopies kind of uh give you a little bit of an illusion that that's those are the entries. And I do like the idea that you have stoops and you would
have entries off of the main street, but I think the uh those kind of canopies may be deployed in a little bit different way to you know sing signify you know the way the space is being used and not entries. I do like Linda's
comment also at the you know the base here. It feels like the stair and the ramp could be integrated into one bigger move that felt like that they were both integrated into kind of a landscape move and not two se completely separate
things. I like that idea a lot, Linda. I think that >> uh could make a a much more um straightforward entry sequence. So it felt like they were integrated in a way that kind of traverse this and made that grade and then it would really play up
this entry a lot better if it had that kind of relationship to each other. >> Um I do like what uh Kurt had mentioned about the possibility of balconies and I know balconies h uh cost money um but it does give you that cue of it feeling
more domestic. The other thing it does is it because if you have so much asphalt, it gives you a little bit of buffer when you're on the inside looking out to be able to, you know, not look directly into the parking lot. So there could be, you know, strategically deployed balconies that give you that
sense of that residential feel. Uh, you know, postco everybody also wants to be outside. So the ability to have that as a as a, you know, a type of unit in this building is is will be really great. I think part of the big part of this is really commending you on the adapted
reuse of this building. This is this is a super challenge and I think you stepped up and I think you did a a really quite a remarkable uh uh thing to make it feel you know uh really domestic. I do think one of the comments
that David Manf Freddy made last time which I remember was the idea that maybe you know to um Mimi's point you can play with the mullions or something where each of the building massings actually has its own kind of identity to really break down that scale as well. I think
the uh the color palette and everything that you're using is is quite nice. I think just the idea of creating kind of unique identities within these masses I think would be helpful. >> Thank you. >> Thanks David. Jonathan I see your hand
up and >> yeah I I just wanted to um maybe zoom in on something Eiseland mentioned which I'm I'm not sure I fully get um but I I'd love to understand more about is I'm looking at this access point. I'm
looking at this access point and I was thinking the same thing, Linda, about this central courtyard. I mean, this plan this plan almost makes you see that because >> you're just you're just you have you have this beautiful um almost pure negative space that's this nice green
rectangle. >> It's almost like the site plan is >> is uh inviting that type of opportunity to happen. You could certainly imagine, you know, that kind of engagement. The one thing that I would like to maybe
propose differently is to not have vehicles cutting through it only because you know it's one thing to park, it's another thing to have a kid running around and there's also cars moving around. Is there is there at all the possibility of say connecting the
parking here? Um, I I know that this may be a wall. This may be a vertical grade that's impenetrable, but I just figured I wanted to throw it out there. I also I'm I'm also prepared to hear that probably this entrance can't go away.
But I just wanted to put on the table the merit of a pedestrian residentowned kind of open space that does not compete with cars and vehicles and is the real central hub of where I can relax and even take a nap in the middle of the
grass if I wanted to type of space. And then maybe the cars are are around the perimeter. I also wonder if just having one entrance, one vehicular ent entrance to the site helps everybody who might be visiting or residents understand how to
um enter this site. You know, just the just the sheer idea of having two curb cuts, I I question. So, I just wanted to put that thought out there. >> Well, you could also make that space smaller, right? I mean because what we've drawn is huge. But I take the
point it's defined by the But you could also start to see whether or not like does you know rationalizing the parking to go head in here >> y >> with a wall for instance and I don't mean to be designing as much as it is
like is there a way to look at the parking in several locations that makes it you know just a little bit more opportunistic and even things like this. You know, if you could start to skew
this and maybe this piece comes over here since it's kind of a no person's land, you know, and then it opens up. Sorry. It opens up um
this area maybe some more which I know has ledge on it but it's also a pretty cool spot you know and the other thing I wanted to ask is if I live here >> Laura I missed where you were commenting is did can others see
>> oh did it not come on >> yeah it's coming up it's >> okay >> she's in the inside corner of those two red boxes there to the left >> in yellow. You're drawing in yellow. >> Yeah. I'm sorry. >> Okay. Okay. I was looking at brown and
then I Okay. >> Yeah. I changed over because I realized brown wouldn't look very >> Let me take off Let me take off uh at least my drawings as well. It might help to clarify >> here. I'll take off mine again. >> Here. Why don't I take them all off?
>> I'll take them all off. We can start. Okay. Okay. So, is there a way to think about back to yellow, I guess. Is there a way to think about skewing this slightly? You know, I know you have ledge. you
don't want to, you know, toss up too much. But even moves like that where you could, you know, look at the parking in a little more rational way might start to clear up. Maybe that zone
that was drawn before is too big. But could it be um I'm looking for a shape. Could it be, you know, this? Could it be smaller? >> Right. And maybe and if that entrance did have to be retained, maybe there's
just a small piece of that where you, you know, you're able to hook in from the entrance into that uh I would even call it potentially more efficient parking run by by by recalibrating it, you may actually pick up a few more spots because it it doesn't look
terribly efficient just with the angle and all that. >> Right. >> Right. And then you could have a landscape that kind of cascades down, you know, so it recognizes that you have different elevations and that's okay. It
actually just makes rooms. Um, I did want to ask one thing. If I want to go here, is this the only way for me to get there? And if >> yes, >> if I'm in one of the A and B, how do I
get there? If I'm in, you know, one of these buildings >> there there is a non-accessible way to go up onto the if you kind of see the walkway that brings you to that from that uh where you on the other side there's a stair that brings you up. It's actually quite
>> this. >> Yes, there's actually it's quite a ways up grade wise from that parking and um and so you can see the number of stairs that are required just to get up to that level. But yes, there is that way.
>> Yeah, >> you Linda. Yeah, I there is a tower at the end of that building and there's a very very high pedestrian ramp that we could see in some of the elevations.
Um I I'm still, you know, maybe that's just worth showing to just to highlight to make sure that that was It's the last. Oh, so there it is. Go back one. Oh, I guess you can see them both. Yeah.
But >> so this is standing inside our courtyard and then you have that large, you know, bridge connection that just feels uncomfortably high. Um, and it goes up to a higher level than the high the highest floor of the
building. Yeah, that's the only accessible way to get up there. >> I see. >> So other other uh people can go inside uh the B building. That's the B building, right? The B building and go
up. >> Correct. Yes. >> Yes. >> There's a an public weigh in. >> Correct. That was one of that was one of the draws of keeping the pedestrian bridge that connects the A and B building is because really the only accessible way
to get up to that that viewpoint is through that uh through that elevator uh and then the bridge that connects to the the upper point of of the property. And the the viewpoint really is amazing. So it's something we really did want to try to utilize and highlight but making it
noticeable is is a challenge. Is that elevator just to get up there or is it also servicing like floors of the building? >> Well, it services floors of the building. Um, we initially had that that building three floors, but uh during a
um code analysis or zoning review, uh we were told that the height cannot exceed uh it's measured from the street level, not from the grade uh adjacent to the building. So, we had to cut we had to take the top floor off. So, >> we're able to keep we're able to keep
the elevator cuz it's a head house um and not >> right >> not counted towards the building elevation, but um we did have to remove a floor. So, that's why it sticks up. It looks a little awkward, but there's this the grade uh is too steep for a wheelchair to go up via the parking lot
or that. So, >> sure. >> Uh that was that was the only way we were able to find a to to really make sense other than having just a random lift. uh are you know cuz that goes up that's that's four stories that that
elevator at that point. >> But is it possible to reorganize the you know open space parking where we have the courtyard in front of us and infill a portion of the building so it doesn't have
this bridgeike quality. I know why you have it in your current design. you know, if you had to get to parking behind, you could still access it through some opening. Um, but I wonder if if that's a possibility from a zoning
perspective. >> It is a possibility. There's nothing stopping us from doing that. Um, it's really a parking count. Unfortunately, it's a parking count um problem that we're we're addressing with with with the parking underneath this building and also to access the other building. we
did for for a short while and we we I'm certainly open to going maybe it's an artificial connection to the building and not an occupiable connection of the um from the site to the to the um parking where maybe we bring some some screens and artificial walls to kind of create the appearance of the building
engaging with this with the with the site there as opposed to having it completely open underneath. I think that would something like that be um kind of fulfill the the concern that you have with this? Yeah, I think it's a both end. If we go to a site plan, I think the organization of the parking
underneath this building isn't talking to the to the building. And so, if we start to imagine like a a courtyard space, you know, whether it's the big green square or a smaller one, does start to have a dialogue with building E. And it's not to limit access to
parking, you know, north of building E. Um, but I do think that what we're lacking here I what you're hearing is a concept for the landscape and we're trying to help find that concept for you. I believe no I agree and that's
that's that's been probably one of the number one struggles is is how do we spend some time? I mean, the shape that you see of that parking under the building E, that's that's an existing condition that's there now, and we're trying to utilize it the most efficient way that we can without having to do a
lot of extra manipulation, coming with a lot of fill and and and and more walls. um we're we're open to maybe to to look at that to kind of create the organization you're looking for for um the way that the exterior sites um you know the interior landscaping elements
kind of work but ultimately we are trying to work with the existing condition as much as we can um just because the amount of effort there is to manipulate the existing condition is is pretty extensive >> on that note I mean I wonder if there's just an exercise where you can look
carefully at restriping and reconfiguring to get to get the parking to be more efficient, which hopefully would generate a higher yield of spaces and then create a carve out of some available um o usable open space in
addition to potentially utilizing some compact spaces. I believe you can you can even go up to 50% compact spaces. So I I I'm not saying, you know, undo what's existing, but maybe re, you know, think about restriping what's existing.
So you can make the parking count more compact and then that opens up an opportunity for for usable open space that's not competing with um because I think that I think the answer is in the parking the open space. The answer is in the parking and trying to make that as
as efficient as you can. You you might give yourself permission to also look at things like relocating the community garden and does this help with the parking counts for instance to kind of rationalize things and would
that allow you to you know put the road here across move it out so that you have more than that little strip in front of D. But, you know, I mean,
we're full of ideas, but you know, we just want we just we know that you are really dealing with a such a hard problem and we're we're just trying to make your project the best that it can be.
>> I appreciate that. and and it is um you know some of the comments that brought up here have stuff that we have explored um and just struggled with trying to figure out how to really utilize them and how to be able to make them work because of the the conditions that we're dealing with. Um, but yeah, I I it I I I
do like the idea of trying to find a way to the very least I mean, I really like that way to find a way to kind of really organize that interior courtyard um in a way that makes it feel less chaotic and and a little bit more um pedestrian friendly or at least a little bit more
um I don't know pedestrian friendly is the right word, but just a little bit more >> organized I guess is the only way I can really really describe it. And um I I do like that that idea. Um, like I said, we are that that roadway right there is an existing roadway that we we hesitate to
try to manipulate too much because of the amount of effort it is there. But I think if we can find a way to organize that space, there is some maybe some potential to kind of manipulate that parking up there to do it um and get um you know get it to be just feel a little bit more organized and kind of define
that space. I I I've I've always seen that courtyard that we've circled as a as a maybe there it just looks when you look at the site plan just looks like this is an ideal courtyard we've created we've created a a quad >> and it but >> in reality it's such a sloping area and
we have this road that goes through it it's it's really hard to organize it in the way that would be really ideal but there are ways we can improve it I think and that will really help a lot >> I think also helping thinking about you know what's the journey like let's say that I couldn't get a parking space to
hear like I'm really trying to understand how do I get and I live in building A. How do I get there? Like like literally how do I get there? >> Yeah, you are absolutely making the worst case situation. But yes, so you see at the end of that
>> but I think that's something you should think about like you know at least a clear I a little journey for how people would get to their front doors I think would be helpful. No, I agree. And there is there is a for example at the end of that that parking we we have a stair
that brings you up to that walkway and from that walkway you can get into the building and then you make your way over to building A. I mean obviously you're parking as far away from building A as you can. So it is going to be arduous no matter how you get in there. Even if it was a flat site you're still walking a long ways, but we have thought about ways for pedestrians to get around the
site. We are trying to utilize the building itself as a way to to to traverse the site because of how steep it is and how difficult it is to kind of walk up some of these these slope these sloping uh walkways or even if we have sidewalks next to the walkways, they're
11% 12% slopes and it's not exactly easy to do that especially if you're having a baby carriage or something with you. Um and of course not not even close if you're if you're in a wheelchair. So no, you know, >> in essence, the building itself is allowing us to diverse the site by
having entrances that allow you to get in and get to the locations that you need to get and and also out of the weather while you're doing it. >> Yeah. Are these buildings connected on the inside? Are they really operating as their own separate buildings? >> The a like AC and D for example.
>> Yeah. >> Yeah. Ultimately the the building itself is considered one building. There is no fire separations or anything between them. inside inside these buildings. We've broken down these buildings more of a as an architectural visual cue as a way to kind of create a site that's a little bit more residential in its feel
by having multiple building um aesthetics, but ultimately the building inside is is one building and it's being treated that way by code. Maybe the Oh, I was just going to suggest that maybe the diagram that would be helpful is understanding these
pathways because I I totally trust that you've thought about ways to get from parking level to entry doors, but we're trying to see it and it's really I'm trying to see it and it's really hard to see in a drawing like this. Maybe like simple arrows. Yeah, >> if you indulge me, I can pull up a diagram that I have of that. I wish I
had added as an appendix in this presentation, but I I kind of at the last minute I forgot to do that. But would you would you um would you want me to kind of pull something like that? So maybe that might make things a little bit clearer, >> Laura, you were gonna have a point. Is it okay? >> No, actually I was going to say exactly
what you said, which was to try to describe a diagram that would kind of show all these things without overburdening the ask. >> No. Yeah, we we did that. We we started from the inside out to a certain extent
to make sure we actually could utilize these buildings from an a residential standpoint. So we did the layouts, we did the hallways. We have an idea as to how how everything is going to lay out in size. Steve can bring that up.
>> Yeah, I'm curious. Are you getting mostly double loaded quarters in there or is there a fair amount of single loaded? It is all double quarters. And um so this is the the site plan that we that we've created. that's more technical and has all the information in
there and it's very difficult to interpret because of how much information we have on the site plan but we we did introduce this di these diagrams here and forgive me this is an older version of the of the um of the landscape. You can see that the >> community garden was over here that we
had discussed but ultimately you can see that um on this would be our kind of site accessibility. If you were if you were had an accessible uh condition, this is the way that you would traverse the site. The areas that we have here in in blue outside of the building are
areas that you can that you could traverse with a wheelchair. And then, you know, and then those would be all interconnected with the u these pathways through the building to allow you to kind of move around the site and all these flat areas are are accessible in in and of themselves. Um
>> Oh, this is so helpful. And then on on as a kind of a a joining thing, this is just kind of gives you an outline of where all of the walkways are through through the site and the ways that you access it. So with this diagram, you can see that we had this walkway that goes up here up the stair to this this area here. And you know, we have the walkways
that kind of allow you to bring around there. They're all not accessible, but they are there are ways to get around the site. Okay. >> Um, if anybody's interested in seeing the an example of the building plans, I can I can pull that up as well.
>> I think that might be useful if it's handy, Steve. >> Yeah. Well, um let me um I think this is a good version of it. So yeah, this is this is the um like the ground floor. This is this is where that
park is along Town Street. So we we have the the lobby waiting area and all these things with the bike parking here. I think you can see this on the site plan, but if you go up to the second floor, you can see that um you know we are we do have a double loaded corridor that goes along here and this corridor that
kind of extends and this is those amenity spaces that are on the level two of that. But as you go up to a third level, you can see we are we just have double loaded corridors all over the place to allow us to have all of our units on the on the exterior of the of the of the building. and that that
extends um to the rear of the building. Um we just have one core that kind of runs down runs down the whole the whole thing. And um and then of course all the floors stack really really well. I I guess I can also
um you know this is this is the the dorm edition with you can see we have just a double decor that runs through the whole the whole middle the middle part of the um with the addition. But we do have on both buildings, you know, you can see how each of these
units has has an entrance out onto the on out to the street, but we also have a a rear entrance in each of these build each of these units here that brings you in. You know, you don't you have access to your unit without going into the building itself, but you also have access to the building and you can get around the building through that. So
those those ground floor units are unique. All right. I'm not seeing any more comments. Jonathan, maybe you are. >> Oh, no. No, >> no, >> no. But you've got a challenge, that's for sure.
Appreciate all the work, though. Yeah, I think you got a lot of good feedback. Um, it maybe this is my simple overview and I'm happy for others to chime in and add and I I think that the architecture is
getting close, very close. I think you heard some comments that were more in the detail category. Um, you know, I'm I'm personally still curious about building E, but that's um something that you could um certainly look at with
staff. I think what you heard mostly is you have an open space challenge that we need some kind of con concept or organization and I think what's what's in conflict is trying to preserve as much as of the
parking areas and terracing that you have today is a challenge with um helping organize the site. I'm sure there's a a a way to do it. I think you got some good feedback on organization
strategies, typologies to help clarify um the open space across your site. But I I would say that would be a place that I would ask Seth that they really focus with the planning department on
on the on an overall concept and um the typologies that were described. >> Certainly. >> Any commissioners would add any other comments? Um the the one thing that I think would be helpful and make the next
review go um a little quicker is to get that diagram that shows building entrances, elevations, um what's happening at the entrances, interior to the building. um
just so the indoor outdoor relationship is better um described cuz I honestly looking at these floor plans I think oh I'm sure we missed some things right we missed relationships that are actually pretty good
>> so I did try to to bring that into the site and I'm curious if you think that maybe we need to address it in a different way so each of the Um, as I introduce each of the buildings, I do have a
um this site plan for example, which shows the the interaction of the inside of the building with the landscaping outside. And I've done that for each of the different the sites in the presentation. >> Yeah. And and that's good, but what I'm really talking about is like what's the FFE of the building at all of the
entrances that hit the landscape and what are those uses? They may all be residential, but I noticed that you have some lounges in there. >> It makes sense to kind of indicate what the hierarchy of the entrances are. Some of the entrances are are really
convenience entrances. >> Yep. >> And some of them are primary entrance and some of them are secondary entrances. Some of them have different functions. >> Yeah. If you could come up with some kind of, you know, coding diagram for those that would be really helpful.
I I don't want to forget the comments we made about the context of the neighborhood and the institutional nature of the facades. So, uh I don't know, maybe I heard I missed that. Was that raised, Amy? >> Yes. I mean, I think it was raised in
our earlier comments. Um but thanks for bringing it to the summary. I think we gave them strategies for thinking about windows, about balconies, about different, you know, uh, color strategies for windows, etc. So, I I
think I think that is something that was brought up in the comments earlier >> and should be addressed. >> Well, definitely. And and thank you commissioners for all this really detailed uh feedback. I know will definitely help guide staff as we work
with the proponent uh in the coming weeks ahead. Um and we will be uh speaking with uh Steven and team a lot. Uh so hearing no additional comments and in lie of a formal vote it's my
understanding that the project is recommended for uh review and recommendation uh by the full commission and there are since there is no vote occurring. There are no formal provisos but of course the summary and this uh feedback that received from the entire
presentation uh will be used to help guide uh us as we work with the proponent in the coming weeks ahead. and we'll bring this back at a at a time when we think that this uh they have shown a responsiveness uh to your comments.
So team commissioners, everyone, thank you all for your for your time and for your efforts um and continuing to make this the best possible project it can be. >> Thank you. Thank you. Thank you all. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thanks
all.