--------- announcement. There we go. Thank you. Uh, I appreciate that. It was interesting. It did say it was a recording before. Um, but just in case my whole preamble wasn't heard, I will
uh give the highlights. Commissioners present include commissioners Love, Kim, Manf Freddy, and Mars. And this evening uh is session A of the Boston Civic Design Commission design subcommittee on Tuesday, June 17th. We are reviewing an
application for Austin Street Lots, otherwise known as 100 to 168 New Rutherford Avenue in Charles Town. Uh they are seeking an ADC entitlement uh for master plan as well as an ADB entitlement for one specific building
within the master plan. We will first hear from the proponent on the master plan and team. You may present whenever ready. Thank you Mimi. Great. Hello everyone. Uh Mark Kleper. I am the team's landscape architect at Cleper Martin Design Group and
presenting me with me tonight is Kendra Hollowell from Icon Architects. Um so all right uh just to start with a um uh few comments that were made or just tracing the comments that were made
recently on this project. We had an introduction of the BCDC um and there was the suggestion of improving pedestrian connections across the site and with building B to be more daring with the design. Uh we had a department meeting with the planning department on
June 3rd um to provide more site information on grading and also look at reducing parking and increase the green space. And on the fourth um we got comments back from the subcommittee uh to focus on constraints, context, precedence and placemaking. And so that
is what I am going to show you. Um, our site is located on New Rutherford Avenue and this is something of a spine that actually connects a lot of various green spaces in Charles Town. Um, our site is obviously the one in the yellow. Uh, and it's linking things as diverse as the
community college, Hood Park, uh, as well as some of the public spaces that are closer to the core of Charles Town as well as North Point Park in Cambridge um, through bicycle and pedestrian connections. So this is coming in a little bit closer to those and you can see we're actually quite close to many
of these spaces. Uh this is the Miller's River uh latoral uh pedestrian path and bikeway which we are connecting to uh as well as making connections that were proposed in the Charles Town uh bike uh proposal uh that brings these shared use
paths across our site and connecting uh at this intersection. Additionally, that plan proposes another bike path on the what's the east side uh of New Rutherford. And you can see here the pedestrian connections that are made to the community college, to the tea, and
to the neighborhood at large. This is the existing site and some existing site photos for those uh who are not familiar with the site. I think most commissioners are pretty familiar with the site at this point. This shows the parking constraints uh in our neighborhoods. You can see that most
streets do not allow parking and those are indicated with the red. There's very little on street parking um that's happening here. So within our site, we're proposing a very small amount of two-hour parking. Go through uh now we're looking at the site toward the west. This is basically
the context um of the various roadways and highways that abut or adjacent to our site, bring people to our site and vehicles. Um there are a number of larger sort of uh entities here. There's the MBTA station, the community college as mentioned before to the north as well as
Boston Sand and Gravel to the west and Charles Town to the east. We are proposing two vehicular connections off of New Rutherford Avenue. One into the north parcel, one into the south parcel. Uh there's a service road which happens behind our site. Um, and we are staying away from
that for the most part, although deliveries can be made uh on that road, but we're trying to keep passenger vehicles off of that to the amount to the degree possible. There's also this important connection for most of uh the industrial use coming off of the Boston
sand and gravel site um and making that connection to Rutherford that goes right through the existing middle road between parcels uh the north and the south parcel. Uh these are showing the uh the bicycle connection. So this is what the plan
previously showed. Uh plan Charles Town sort of refigured this connection uh happening along the service road underneath the Gilmore Bridge to the community college and also parallel to New Rutherford and proposed another one on the east side. Um and also it
proposes having a a crossing over New Rutherford that does not exist currently. um which is an extension of Middle Road. Um these are where we are making pedestrian connections onto the site. There are three existing those happen at the corners here under the Gilmore
Bridge at Austin Street intersection and also here at the Route One off-ramp um where there's signalized intersections and it's also proposing another one located here if and when this becomes a signalized crossing. Uh there are a number of other things
that are constraining the site. There's a chapter 91 line which mostly impacts how high the buildings can be. So it's setting a 130 foot height limit within that that dashed area. We're b we're adjacent to a FEMA flood plane although it's not really on our site except for
just a small amount in the corner. Um the sea level rise 2070 base elevation is at 19.5 here and you can see that that does come onto our site somewhat mostly through middle road but some of the edges are also affected. So
as part of that and uh sort of reconciling grade with existing uh road elevations on new Rford a we're proposing to basically raise the site up to elevation 21.5 on both sites. Uh there are a number of infrastructure
uh implications on the site as well. We have uh a number of BWSC lines running across our site. This one also carries with it um uh a sort of rightaway no build zone along the back side of our site. So that's saying how far we can place uh the buildings along service
road. We have um a 12-in line, two 12-in lines actually coming through the south parcel. So that's also governing where where buildings can be located. We have a telcom duck bank that runs basically along the sidewalk which limits how we can do street trees. Um
and uh there's just a number of other implications here. The Gilmore Bridge, there's a possibility of it expanding onto our site. So this is allowing for a sidewalk to be widening across the Gilmore Bridge. Um so as a result of all of those
constraints, the parti is to create these two sort of open courtyards that basically shield uh the courtyards from I93 and the industrial noise um with taller buildings on the west side and open toward the neighborhood um and both
the north parcel and the south parcel toward the east uh in order to create a sort of more open connection to um the neighborhoods. Uh, also there's a requirement to have blue bikes on our site. There is an existing blue bike station here uh at
the community college just across the street. So, we're proposing that our our station be located down here in the southern end of the south parcel um just as a way of getting some geographic distribution across the site and also making the connection to the bikeway
which actually starts uh right here. In the center of both these courtyards are open spaces that are mostly lawn spaces that can be used for recreation um and even active uh recreation uh anticipated to be sort of youth team sports uh in some cases but it's
intended to be sort of the nexus of uh these neighborhoods people who live here and people who live adjacent um to use as open space. Uh, one thing that we've started working on since the introduction to the full BCDC two weeks ago was trying to unify
the north and south parcel. Um, this it was it was a great honor to be William Ron's last project uh to be seen as a member of the BCDC and one of his suggestions was he really wanted to see the connection between the north and south parcel and so we're proposing uh this ribbon link that starts to do that
in the ways that we can. Um, one of the ways that we're reinforcing that is this could be uh a different color pavement probably along the the public way. Uh, that might not be possible. It's sort of up to the city whether we can do that or not. Um, but we're also proposing that
there's some kind of beacons that start to connect the sites. Um, that could be sculptural uh, light fixtures that are picking up their cues from what happens on the on-ramp to Route One, although probably different in character, possibly different in scale because a
different scale is necessary. Uh on this thoroughare we are also proposing an awful lot of vegetation uh as a way of creating edges edges to the street connections uh either open or closed to the buildings depending on the ground floor programs.
Ken want to take this? Yes. Great. Thanks Mark. Thanks everybody. Um uh so we are proposing uh that the 9 to 13 story taller building massing will line service road, middle road and Gilmore
Bridge. This will screen the open space from I93 and from the traffic and will relate to the scale of Cambridge crossing. Next slide. Thank you. Six and sevenstory building volumes will shield the open space that
marks creating and step down mediating the neighborhood scale Charles Town and sheltering these courtyard spaces. Next, thank you. Uh these these master plan guiding principles will provide consistency across the four parcels as
they are designed and built over time. First ground floor program uses will frame and activate the landscape spaces. Primary entrances for each building will open onto the courtyards. Clear datams will delineate the
buildings at a pedestrian scale as well as from afar. The penthouse level will wrap the upper stories aligning with the top floor of the stepped down volume along New Rutherford. Andrew, you're about halfway. Okay.
Programmatically, the buildings are paired. Outermost buildings A and D will bookend the site and will relate to one another and express their public uses of youth recreation and arts uses through a vibrant textural expression. The two
buildings framing Middle Road, buildings B and C, will employ transitional materials and relate to one another through more subtle textures and fenestration. Next slide. So, this is the site plan uh of both
parcels with the ground floor program shown. Um here you can see what we've been working on the past two weeks is this sort of ribbon idea that moves across the sites um and connects them all the way from north to south. U we've also been uh working on just
reconfiguring some of these open spaces. So here we had a double loaded parking lot. We've now broken that into two separate parking lots um just as a way to uh increase the the open space here. We've reduced this as plaza space and the plaza is now sort of a widening of
this ribbon that that is working to connect both sites together. Um this still allows uh pedestrian vehicles that are entering the site to come in and use this uh turnaround to go back out again. Um and service vehicles can cross uh
through the site to the loading zones on service road. Same thing is happening on the southern parcel um where uh passenger vehicles can use this roundabout and return out to New Rutherford uh and service vehicles can use the loading docks here and there's
another one here for building um C. I' I'd love to just add I think it's important when we were in the introductory session uh there was a question why don't we make a a a greater connection across middle road. I think we're uh bound to uh maintain the
crossing up along New Rutherford Avenue. Um that's where the improvements along New Rutherford are going to be along that boulevard along that street. And we're uh we're reinforcing that connection. So residents and visitors
are going to sort of loop down into the sites and come back out similar to that first diagram that Mark showed with um like a necklace of open spaces off New Rutherford Avenue. So this is zoomed into the north parcel.
Um so here you can really start to see the great elevations. So, we're still keeping this uh finished floor elevation of the gallery at 28, which is roughly about 6 in above sidewalk down here. So, we think that this makes sense to have the building slightly above existing grade at the sidewalk. The other
buildings are now set down to elevation 23. Um, which again is sort of tied to where they're coming onto the site, having this zone be relatively flat, and then there's um some steepness here to make the connection out the service road. So that had been a concern in the
past that the lobbies of these buildings were too high. Um and so we re we we sort of feel that we've got the right height now with them sitting at 23. And you can see um the way the the public parts of the building are on North Rutherford. The entrance actually is
from this courtyard here provided another entrance here into the bike room on the corner. Um building A's uh lobby is uh imagined here with its entrance. Um, and it also is at elevation 23, so matching the plaza outside.
These are a couple of precedents that we've been looking at for just character. One of the things that we've been really interested in looking at is uh how the open space starts to relate to the ground floor uses. And we think this is a pretty good idea of what that might be like. So, we have a lawn space that can be used for a lot of different
things. can have trees uh that start to create shaded areas within the lawn as well as open lawn space uh in that zone. On the south parcel, we're thinking about how those building spaces can start to move out with paved areas that are adjacent to the fields. Um so we
might have a playing field without say a fence located here, but enough depth to actually um have a little bit of fringe space. Um, but really this public space is going to spill down onto the fields. And then along the driveway, which would
be the north side and the new Rutherford AB side, we would have um fences that would um stop balls from going out into the street and not um you know have having um breaking that sort of uh connection or possibility of things
moving out onto the street. Um, so we're imagining that that type of fencing is probably more like this athletic fencing that's very transparent. In other places, like along the driveway, it might become more playful and artistic. Um, these are a couple of precedent
images. This is actually very close to our site. Ross Miller did these pieces uh along the Miller's River Lator Way. um we're imagining some sort of beacon like this or some sort of uh element that becomes really uh identifiable that starts to link the north and the south
parcels together as a placemaking device. So it's sort of a basic diagram. This is where we've been working for the last uh the last week primarily on the north parcel. But here on the south parcel we're also starting to look at dissolving um this relationship of how
the buildings and the field start to relate. And we might do something where uh the the path through actually starts to become a little bit more fluid and gives us uh a wider uh zone in which to make the building to open space or lawn
space a little bit more flexible. Um so that's something that we're still looking at. We've been primarily looking at parcel um uh the north parcel for the last two weeks. Um just to give an indication of how we imagine programming to go, this is an uh
aerial view looking down into that site and these are some of the programs that we imagine happening here. So a lot of the ground floor functions start to move out. We imagine that this becomes sort of a gallery art walk here at the corner. This is uh just a lawn space versus some things that can happen on a
pave space like food trucks could be parked in the driveboard as well as farmers market that type of activity. Um ride share drop off would happen in a turnaround. We have neighborhood parking for short-term uh in these surface lots located here and here. Um and uh we've
now been able to include a little bit of landscape along the edge where the building is coming down to New Rutherford and thinking about ways to define these landscape spaces. um as century gardens or here we're thinking about this zone as being more like a
miwaki forest that actually is is making this um delineation between the lawn and the athletic areas from the sidewalk. Um this is a 12 foot wide uh multi-unction path which is pedestrians and cycles um
which are moving along this edge here. These are diagrams that I showed previously. This is how vehicles are moving accessing the site. So the idea pedestrian uh residents passenger vehicles are coming in and going out returning to New Rutherford and not using service road. And the blue lines
are indicating how service vehicles access the site and where the loading zones are. Uh and this is also showing the pedestrian connection. So the heavy red line are the major paths that are being connected across the site. The smaller ones are building entrances and making
connections uh in a more sort of local way within the sites themselves. The blue bike stations located here and here on this one as well as the connections that are being made to the neighborhood. There was the request for some sections. We have lots and lots of sections. I'm
only going to show you four, but we have all of these in the deck if you'd like to see them. Um we're going to show you the ones that are circled. So, we have two sections along Rutherford. This is at the gallery space. So here grade is starting to step down from the corner. Um and we're proposing steps. It's also
there's a ramp and just a sidewalk connection to the corner which happens in this location. Street tree planting is possible here. This is closer to further down south on this north parcel. So this is next to building B. We've been able to include
some landscape zone. Now, um we have the 12t wide multi- uh shared use path and then a 3- foot wide um furnishing zone. This is a section through um the sort of courtyard space between A and B. Uh so
this is building A located here, the slope that is uh transitioning higher grades down with the lawn space. And then this is the driveway located here. And Mark, about a minute left. Great. Uh so this is the courtyard space at building B. Um so again this is where
the parking picks up. This is almost like a split from the previous section that you saw. Building B is located here. Uh this is along service road. Um so here grade is the FF is much much higher than the sidewalk. Um but this is mostly
uh the shared use path that's connecting to the community college. And that is it. Happy to return to whatever you would like to see any more of since that went pretty quickly. Mark, could you just go back to a site
plan? That would be helpful. Yeah. Back to this one. Me too. I should also say this is the uh the site plan that was shown in the last meeting the full commission.
All right, commissioners. Who wants to get us going? I'm I'm I'm happy to start a little, you know, with some comments. This is meant to be a conversation. Um, so I'll just open it up. You know, I think what was really good to see, Mark,
was all of the constraints. This this project has been defined almost by constraints. Um, so it's helpful to see all that you're wrestling with. What I'm trying to figure out is beyond the constraints,
you know, where where is there a real concept that we're, you know, helping you um expand on? And so I feel like the ribbon the this idea of a ribbon going through the site is starting to get at something that we could latch on to in
terms of an idea. But um but it even within that it doesn't have consistencies uh that I'm seeing and and it's honestly because of the constraint. So we can see on the north side this ribbon is a little bit more sineuous and pathways
you know are more nuanced but then it becomes a little bit staggered by the fields on the south parcel. And so maybe just hearing you talk a little bit about, you know, it feels like the buildings came first and then the ribbon. And I just wonder if there is a a way where
the ribbon can also help to influence what's happening in the master plan. I'm just trying to grab grab at a concept to help talk about the planning of the site other than the constraints you've dealt with. So uh yeah, no, I appreciate that
comment. Um you know I think that uh it has been largely constrained by the utilities and then where buildings can go what those volumes need to be um to provide what fits in them. Um I think in the last round of this over a year ago we also started to work on the south
parcel with some with a path that meandered more across the site. Ultimately, um we had some driveways that accommodated uh the industrial uses that just did not work relative to the city grid and access onto New Rutherford. So, not
having those has been helpful because it's allowed us to have a little bit more space to include landscape. So, I think what we've done on the north side is start to free it up a little bit and not think so strictly about how the green space has to meet certain
dimensional criteria. um and the way that paved space and green space might start to be a little bit more blended. I think we need to do that same operation on the south side where um the the green space might start
to become a little bit more organic in its shape and that the ribbon then starts to border that although not necessarily define it. um to make sort of cross sight connections um in a better way and make a better
connection to the Miller's River Lator way um as well as beefing up that edge that we're right now thinking about as a sort of linear Miwoki forest. Um so that's sort of you can just start to see it within the courtyard of building C
which is located here. Um, this also includes an area that's the exterior space for the early childhood program that's at the ground floor. And we sort of imagine that being located here, but trying to have adequate space for a
robust landscape program has been a little bit challenging. Yeah, I see that Katherine has a hand raised. I'm going to pass it to her. I I do think that the because we're reviewing it at a master plan level, it would be helpful to see even, you know,
building C and D, adjacent open space, um with some kind of programming, um I guess a little bit more similar to what we're seeing on the north side. But let's see what Katherine has to say. Uh thank you. Um appreciate the the
presentation. Um there's a couple things that were coming to mind for me. uh and especially around the use of open space. Um when I think about this conceptually, um it's feeling like the open space is plotted last. Um it doesn't there's not
a connective enough of a connective tissue to um the design of of all of the buildings. It's it's been a little lost for me throughout the presentation. Um, so I would challenge you all to think about uh the actual physical design of
this space as being a continuous story uh that's woven uh between both buildings. Um, and then the other piece um as I was thinking about this this particular um uh um site uh because I
know exactly where these roads are. Is there any cause for concern around uh the service road and having the middle road um uh be open and I'm I'm saying this in the context of if
residents are are clustered on one side particularly on the service road side is there any cause of concern around noise distraction uh any of those things um is is a larger
question that I I have for this um and that's it. Great. Kendra, do you want to Yeah, sure. I'll I'll take a pass at this. I mean, um we we've been looking at this site for a couple of years now. Um it
certainly has a significant number of constraints. Um you know, not least of which being busy streets on, you know, on all four sides. Uh but this is also in the city and there are, you know, there are busy streets and highways
around much of the city, train lines um cutting through the city. Um, and um, we're designing this in order to create the best place we can, the the most usable, the most protected open space,
which is why we placed the buildings with their back against service road, which is where the MBTA is and the highway is. And we've created this the landscape buffer that Mark was speaking to along the edge of the playing fields on the southern site. you know, we're
we're using the buildings as a screen wall to protect the open space and the larger uh neighborhood of Charles Town beyond. So, we're definitely thinking about this and doing the best we can, thinking about all of these edges and um and creating a place we hope people will
love to live. And if I might uh just also add to that uh to address uh Katherine your concerns here. I think the city you know shares the concerns regarding uh truck traffic here on service road. Earlier iterations
of this project, right, actually included more intervention and redesign of service road and middle road and and looked to, you know, uh see best practices in terms of calming traffic and tightening up road rate uh radi turning radi and um prioritizing
pedestrians. Um unfortunately um these uh particularly middle road and service road to right of page uh of middle road really need to be priority truck routes. Um and so the challenge has then been how can how can the uh
overall site approach how can the accommodations for pedestrians really work around that constraint. Um and you know in part that is what determined the channeling of pedestrian routes to be at the edge of New Rutherford. Um of course
you know Rutherford Avenue is is in a a state you know uh today. Um the city does have uh you know long-term plans to potentially you know turn New Rutherford into a boulevard. you know that is not
something you know on the table for the near future and and not something that um you know the team can design around. So we've asked them to very much try to work with the existing conditions um both on new Rutherford uh middle and service road uh and you know uh come to
as uh strong and strategic responses to those edges as possible. Thanks, Seth. David Ben Freddy. So, um, thank you for your presentation.
Um I'm um I want to ask you about how you think about this site in terms of um how where it fits in urban context versus
something less than historic or traditional urban context. And here's what I mean. Yeah, this is a very hard site. Start there. Um, lots of things going on around you. And maybe the maybe one of the most significant is what what
uh Seth just said, the uncertainty of what Rutherford Avenue is going to look like in I don't know how to fill in the blank, but 20 years. Um, but there are some there are some um I think there's some clues here in how
you're thinking about this that I' I'd like to hear you explain. And that is um and I and I understand the strategy of building mass against the service road, protecting the green space. Um,
and I know how hard New Rutherford is, but I see these kind almost I don't know roundabouts uh in the middle of the site and short-term I'm sure surface parking in the site and it reminds it makes me think very in a very about a very um not
a very but a a less urban condition about a more suburban condition and makes me wonder um if if you had an attitude about
Rutherford Avenue as a boulevard and as a um um a sidewalk that you wanted to walk, uh that um engaged pedestrians, that had all of the elements that we all
wanted to have and made connectivity and took to a a future Bunker Hill Community College and um a a a opportunity to find your way to Main
Street and Charles Town and all of those things. What would you do differently? Um I I guess I feel and and I guess and I understand why but it I feel that um
it the plan is kind of isolated meaning it's um the connections are so hard that it feels like an island or maybe it's two islands and and um I I I don't
I'm not I'm not really pressing pushing hard back on that because how do you plan for something that may happen in 20 years? But I'm I'm wondering how I I just like to hear you and Mark, you've been so articulate in this in the
explanation of what you're what you've proposed. How you think about that? How you think about first of all bringing cars into the center of the site? Um providing parking for cars in the center of the site, letting them turn around and find their way back out again. Um
uh and uh what other what other ways did you think about this as you came up with the plan? Love those questions. Uh because you know I think how how I think about like a drive court to be in
an urban environment is it's a drive court. It's paved and it's multi-purpose. And we started there with a paved multi-purpose drive court. But then we had the criticism that it would be great to have more green space. And yes, it would be great to have more
green space. The only place to get that green space was out of these sort of more urban drive courts that were more multiunctional. So what we did was we like looked at the engineering uh passroughs of a firetruck and a car and
a turning radi wherever the cars weren't that was green. And it that's not the best way to go about site planning something. And I think the result is you know you've you've uh nailed it in a way. It feels very much not urban as a
result. Um, I I personally think uh a drive court might be better that actually does feel more urban and it would be urban um and can be used in a more more effectively as a farmers market but still allow a
car to turn around in it or something. So relative to those sort of culde-sac moments within the plan, I think that that's been an evolution. It's also been fairly much dictated to us that we have
cars enter and exit from Rutherford Avenue and we don't the the people who are, you know, circulating here don't really have access to these other industrial streets. Um, and there's good reason for that for safety. You know, I think safety is also been this kind of
underlying concern. That's why there's one crossing at Middle Road. Um, you know, right now there's a midblock crossing that's like technically there, although it doesn't really make that much sense in the existing condition. It's dangerous because as the trucks are making their turn, they're picking up
speed and they're about to make another turn with very large radius um corners down here on service road. This speaks to the velocity with which these trucks are moving. Um, so to have a connection here really is not safe, which was
that's why it was decided to go here. The idea of what this becomes when it's a boulevard, I think is a really great opportunity. So, I can imagine a day when the curb moves out a little bit that you actually have a very robust
street planting that can happen all the way along here, which is not something we can do right now because of the infrastructure that's parked under our sidewalk for most of the south parcel. Um, it might have parking like Memorial Drive for instance. Uh, it might not
have parking. I could imagine it being great either way. If you gave up that spacing space for parking and made it landscape, you'd have a really robust green edge there. The thing you I I can sort of imagine on the north parcel more because it's trying to be that. We've got enough room for some street trees.
We have enough room for uh landscape underneath those. So, we're not imagining that to be paved and we have a really robust sidewalk that allows pads and bicycles. when you get to the south side, it would be better to augment that with whatever changes are happening out
here in the roadway in the rightway. Um, for now, we have made a buffer happen inboard of our property line to that street. I can imagine a day when this boulevard is something different and really wonderful. Um, uh, we worked on
the the Bundon Shanghai and it became exactly that. It used to be a highway, then it became a boulevard. And when it became a boulevard, there was the opportunity of having these parks that connected to that new boulevard. And the same thing could happen here. I would imagine that when this became a
boulevard, this zone might be rethought. So, right now, there's a connection of this space trying to make a link to the community or to a better street here, but it's not that now. So, we've buffered it with those street trees. Here, we didn't have room to do that.
So, we've buffered it with this. I can imagine that if this became a better landscape edge, this might become completely reconfigured. There might be a redesign of how all of this open space connects to what becomes the pedestrian section of this boulevard. That could be
quite rich um and and really pretty nice. And that's why I think we want to spend more time reconfiguring what this looks like so there's a little bit more space uh and generosity of people to be able to sit and observe what's going on if like little kids have set up soccer
practice or something like that. A place for the parents to hang out, watch that, be part of that. um without it being so like just down to kind of minimums of circulation width and a little bit of space um for people to be adjacent to
that space and not necessarily in that space. Well, thank you. I I appreciate the answers very much and and uh I was wondering why you wouldn't connect New Rutherford to service uh in a more urban
kind of way maybe even with parallel parking and a complete street and what you're telling me is you can't drive out onto service road um which um u yeah and I love by the way your analogy to or
your vision that um This could be Memorial Drive, meaning significant amounts of traffic and parallel parking uh and and great sidewalks uh and bike paths uh where people want to go on a regular basis, you know, whether it's
closed, whether it's Sunday or whether it's Thursday. Yeah. I I should also mention that um you know comments from commissioners uh during the earlier review of this project I think it came up at the uh
reintroduction and it's been a question for staff as well is really how the buildings and the landscape interact and meet each other right yeah the elevations um the ground planes um I think particularly acute is how the open
space in the south lot uh relates to this building uh D which has the um uh youth recreation program in the base and what you're seeing here are three 90 by90 fields originally uh there were four 90 by90 fields and that was a
aspiration that was included in the RFP or the disposition of this as city land. Um you know there is a real intent and and need for active recreation space in this area. Um but uh as we've gotten
deeper into the review of this project and the constraints um we are city staff are asking the proponent to start looking at some options for the configuration of the southern site that maintain the spirit and the the ultimately usability of the fields for
some active recreation but may relax on the actual dimensions. And so we're we're asking them to look at a variety of scenarios of of how to achieve that, you know, with with active recreation, but perhaps creating uh new opportunities for different
relationships to the edge along New Rutherford and the edge along uh building D especially uh and perhaps even the layout of the internal roadway there as well. Um, I just want to pick up on some of the things that David and Mimi have
brought up. Um, am I I remember last year there was a road that biseected the south site that you guys called like a wounderf or something. Am I misremembering that? That's correct. That's correct. And then you had on the left on the north site
you had sort of this roadway it sort you flipped the site right the if I'm remembering correctly the lawn was on the other side and then you had like a fire lane and other things going on. Yes. And I feel like
there's a way in which maybe the ribbon as a concept might be limiting you. I mean, I love the idea of a ribbon and I I love the the fluidity of it, especially on the north side of the site, but I see
something that's happening, which is that, you know, this is such a tough project because you've got so many constraints and you're solving so many individual problems of all the different kind of circulations that are happening here.
I just wanted to bring back the idea of the wound nerf because I think what's happened now that I see in the plan, I think some things have really been improved and I really like um a lot of the changes, but some things I I feel
like the big move is that you've individualized each ribbon of movement. And what the wounder did for me was it sort of it became more urban. It's like consolidating parking, pedestrian movement, you know,
it had this kind of fluidity to it that's much more urban. And I don't know what the answer is, but it does feel to me that the kind of turnaround and the parking and and the kind of solutions,
the resolution that they're bringing to the particular problems that you have locally are are kind of making it harder to understand the conceptual framework. work that that
binds us together. So, for example, one thing that I'm not sure of, and I'm looking forward to seeing this, Mark, as you move forward, is the north and the south site. My h my hunch is it's very hard to connect them. It's it's a middle road
divides it. I think we've a million times said, "Oh, hopefully that we could bring the ribbon across the road." And they never let us do that, right? Even in the public sidewalk, they never let us bring whatever you're considering as yellow on there. And so I just am going
to ask the question, I don't know the answer to it. Is this is a big project. Do the two projects actually have to be the same? Right? like can they you know and I don't know if this is the
right question to ask but it it feels like it's um going to be difficult on the south side to make the ribbon work as elegantly as you have on the north side. And so I just wonder if you can just conceptually think about it to
say maybe they're not connected. maybe maybe both the architecture and landscape and it might break down the scale of this overall development in the master plan vision rather than saying because I see so many of these kinds of developments now happening sprouting out
up all over everywhere Alustin everywhere and there is this desire to sort of make everything sort of match and I'm not sure in terms of scale whether that always is the right strategy And for you, Mark, I feel like it's
hemmed you in to making these the ribbon of the road, the ribbon of the pedestrian, the crossing of the two more challenging. And so it's just a question I have about
the master plan is can they connect? Should they connect? Should they be similar? Should they be cousins? Should they really feel different architecturally and in terms of the landscape? Um they're just all questions I have. Um so that's the
bigger question I have. the the more um granular comment that I have is just I feel like maybe you could just at the master plan level think about using a third material which is landform to help start to kind of when I look at
the section uh through the south side and even through the north side it's quite flat from the building like the lawn is really flat and and I feel I think there's lots of opportunities not to
make, you know, 7 foot tall landforms, but to do these kind of very subtle like the landforms you find in these London parks where you can't almost tell that they're there until like there's you guys do such a beautiful job of like regrading slopes. Um, I remember seeing
my son when he was like in second grade running and then disappearing and realizing this plane of lawn was actually lifting up because he just disappeared. I mean, he may have only been like three and a half feet tall at that time, but I just wonder if there's like in the
sections, which I found so helpful to see just because I feel like more and more we're seeing all the landscape always just in plan, but I wonder if there's a way in which like the edges at least temporarily until New Rutherford becomes a boulevard could become a
little more protected and have like maybe some landform movement with the planting that you're discussing. And same thing with North Side. I think there's a lot of interesting things here in terms of space allocation, but there's a larger kind of conceptual
underpinning that I'd love for you to just think about and kind of come back with a really strong point of view like no, they're not connected. Yes, they are connected. Uh, you know, yes, it is a ribbon. Um, or there's a kind of more
free flow between vehicles. you know, I I personally just love wounds. I think they're they're they work really well in these residential uh settings as well. Um so,
so there's a lot of interesting things from what I remember seeing before. Um and they're sort of at the uh formative stage. So, as you said, you've been kind of developing these from from two weeks ago, and I'm just looking forward to
seeing how you guys continue to work this out. Yeah, I appreciate that. You know, to me, the best part right now is right here. Yeah. Where you do actually go from 28 down to 23. And that that allows something like a stair. It's like a room
there. I think there's something very lovely in the way that the path becomes a plaza and I just wonder if you stop drawing maybe you like there are places where the yellow color and the tan color don't
have to be so segregated. Now, I know that can be dangerous, but maybe as an exercise it might help to because I I do like I almost like when I look at the north side, if I take away the tan, I I really like the project. Mhm. And so
maybe there's a way. I I don't have the answer, but I I just wonder if the tan could take on some of the uh gestures of the yellow. Great. Those are great comments.
I'll chime in. Um, there was a drawing that I thought was a really nice way to describe the architecture. It's an Axon drawing and it had the volumes the six to seven story height volumes clearly
identified and maybe you know as part of the master plan strategy. I I really thought that this was strong and it had that consistency of, oh, I get it. The, you know, back um portion of the
buildings has a linear relationship parallel to the service road in 93 and is is the you know um contains that open space. This feels really good. But I really feel like in terms of the master
plan, relating, you know, those frontest pieces and thinking about the architecture is a way is a really nice way of setting it up as those are, you know, the um maybe those are the special moments in relationship to the
the back bar, which could be pretty simple in terms of the architecture and where you put the emphasis on the design elements. you've kind of are starting to suggest that in shape of the building when on building A. Um, but that's just
a comment. It doesn't seem like from what you showed in the material strategy that you have that same strategy in mind for those volumes. I know we're going to transition to architecture next. Um but I do think that
you know dependent on what you decide is if if this is a cohesive site or you know a the block A and B is separate from C and D. I do think that that at least could be one of the elements that ties it together these
lower form buildings and how you treat them in terms of materiality uh and distinctness from the back portion of the bar. So this is just a nice diagram that helps explain it for me.
Thanks Mimi. Yeah, if if I may note, I think when we came to BCDC a year ago, we did have an approach where we were treating the north site as a pair of buildings that
were closely related and C and D on the southern parcel were a pair of buildings that were closely related. We have since sort of shifted I think Mark would you go a couple of slides forward to where we've got the pink outer boxes other way
maybe Jen maybe you're driving I'm not sure got it couple maybe one more or three more sorry where we've got the pink boxes on the corner right so C B and C are really framing middle road so
there is a relationship there um right We're going to be talking about building B in a moment, but um the two around Middle Road do need to relate. They are framing that road in particular. Buildings A and D have programmatic differences. Uh building A has this
gallery. It's very public facing. It wants to express this community of arts within this building. It's up at the corner of Austin Street. So that wants to be vibrant and expressive. And similarly on the southern the bottom of the southern parcel uh building D has
the youth recreation which also has a larger expression. So we've we've sort of shifted from where we were a year ago to uh a slightly more um uh
subtle but uh relative approach. Right there they're there are layers of relation between the buildings. Yeah. And I think that I think that could be a nice distinction like what's more, you know, public facing and what's more
um residential. So I think that could work as a strategy. Can I just ask one? It's actually quite a minor detail, but as Mick Young was going over her comments, I am curious why building D, the elevation of the
ground level, is so much higher than the lawn to ne to create what seems to be long ramps and stairs. Um, like what is that height difference and could that be more achieved through
like a landform or or something that makes that elevation change seem um less of a of a built condition, right? I mean, this this site is a bowl that the high points are up at I'll say up at the
gallery at Austin Street and at the corner by the youth recreation. I think we're up at 28 29. Um at the middle we're down at 18. So there's a pretty there's a significant grade change that we're working on. Um I think it's also
notable we are currently showing we're planning to put parking underneath these buildings and we are in a flood zone. So we have to lift these up. Right. So our first floor level wants to be at elevation 21. Um, so we're all these reason are
reasons to lift the buildings up. I know urbanistically, programmatically, um, or, uh, for access, we want those ground floors to be at grade. We have just um uh pushed the ground level for
the lobby of building A um probably at the expense of some parking. Push that down to meet the same floor level as building B, which does not intend to have parking underneath it. So, it's got quite got some flexibility there. I think we're we'll continue to explore
building B and that floor level relation as well. You know, I think there there's potentially an opportunity there as well, much like at building A where the gallery opens up and then there's the walkway and the large boulders that can step down and the grade changes down to
that lower level. You know, that might be something that we could do uh similarly as a as a seating area to overlook the open space on the southern parcel. Yeah, I Okay. I don't know that I followed all of that specifically, but
the elevation, the first floor elevation of D is what? I think it's at 26. It's at 26. And the and the fields are at 23
24, right? Okay. So, it's a five foot and and that is necessary only to tuck parking underneath. It's a couple of feet. Mark, did you say it's at 24? Right. Yeah. 23 20. Right. And the ground level, I believe, is at
26. So, it's 2 ft up. Okay. I was hearing five. All right. Well, I think Yeah, I think that relationship wants to reduce as much as possible. Yeah. As Seth said, relaxing
the size of these fields and actually giving us some more latitude of how we actually use horizontal space will make significant difference um that it was hard to shoehorn everything in at the sizes they were. And so that's how you
get these abrupt walls to be the transitions between things. So I am looking forward to not having that constraint any longer. Yep. Keeping maintaining the spirit of the of
of open playing fields for kids to kick a ball around. I'm realizing and people to be on the fringes of it. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I'm realizing when we transition to building B, I'm not going to have the opportunity
to just ask the question about the N end conditions, the short sides of D, C, B, and A. Each one of them has a slightly different condition. D and A are flush. C has a step. B and C facing middle road have a
chamfer. B has a half chamfer. I I I want to see consistency to build your diagram up a bit. And so that I'm just going to leave that. You don't even have to answer, but it's just I hear you. I hear you. We I I think um I think
further simplification maybe will provide us greater flexibility in the future. Thank you. Beth, should we move to the take public comment on the master plan first? I was about to say we just hit about uh 37 minutes and and actually
we'd move to the presentation for building B uh commissioner comments and then public comments. Okay. Um I did just and then discussion of next steps. I did just want to mention that yes, as part of the master plan, you know, phase consistent with how we handle ADC
projects, we'll be looking for the proponent to put together a set of clear design guidelines um that speak to uh the overriding principles behind this so that as each of the buildings gets designed in the future um whenever that
is right, there are some principles that they follow. There are some things that we may want uh to keep as harder um principles and guidelines and then other things that allow more flexibility uh for individual expression. And the question really is what are those
elements um and and and features of the buildings that we want to uh have uh a certain amount of let's say um you know predict predictability over in the master plan. and what do we want to uh
continue to allow flexibility for? So with that, I will ask the proponent to move on for building B. And uh you have 15 minutes. I will give you a halftime and one minute warning.
Right. Let me just hit send on my notes. Okay. Great. Looking for the share button. Great. Thanks everyone. I wasn't ready for quite the quick transition. So, can
you all see my screen? Yes. Wonderful. Thank you. All right. The proposed first phase consists of building B through the large project review. Referring back to the massing approach and master design guidelines we looked at a few minutes ago, we'll focus in on
building B. Backing up to service road and middle road, the taller portion of the building sets a backdrop for the new community. The lower volume shields the open space and reaches toward the future faceted corner of building A, mediating
the NA mediating towards the neighborhood scale of Charles Town's residential homes. Following the master plan guiding principles, building B's ground floor program uses frame and activate the landscape spaces and the primary ent
entrances will open onto the courtyard set back from busy New Rutherford Avenue, at least as it is today. Clear DATMSS will delineate the building at a pedestrian scale, setting the L and the shield to provide pedestrian scaled architectural elements.
Oops, sorry. The penthouse level will wrap the upper stories and align with the top floor of the stepping down volume along New Rutherford. Following through on the volutric and material relationships, buildings B and
C will frame Middle Road and will employ transitional materials relating to one another through subtle textures and fenestration. Phase one includes the new building, the adjacent drive, turnaround, and landscaped courtyard and open lawn, as
well as the adjacent shared pathway for bikes and pedestrians across three sides of the phase 1 site, New Rutherford, Middle and Service Roads. We've shared that there is only one crossing at Middle Road. All pedestrians and bikes will be crossing at New Rutherford Edge.
The site is well connected with larger Charles Town and the Orange Line. There's an the enhancement plan is in the works for New Rutherford that will create more pedestrian-friendly crossings. In addition, there's a a pedestrian connection under the Gilmore
Bridge directly to the MBTA station. The building is oriented inward creating a sheltered courtyard oasis for the residents. Lobby and amenity spaces activate the street, while the main entrance is set within the courtyard
adjacent to short-term parking and casual seating. A secondary entrance at New Rutherford and Middle Road will house a bike lounge celebrating act active transit at this location. Services and back of house will be along
service road. As part of the overall master plan, the gallery space will support live workspaces on the lower level that will open out and increase activity on the lawn and patio area, bringing community uses onto the site.
The massing and circulation party highlights three key ideas. The courtyard will provide protected open space. The primary entry is recessed from the street for a more residential scale. and two distinct volumes will create a courtyard.
We've looked to nearby buildings for inspiration, drawing on Charles Town's community to ground the design in its context. Strong delineation of the attic story, thoughtful detailing will root this new architecture into the neighborhood. We've adjusted the building's
proportions to create a grounded base with contemporary masonry detailing, topped by a crisp, clean attic story cladded metal panel. The design takes a transitional approach rooted in Charles Town's architectural character but
expressed with a modern sensibility. This 50 over2 podium structure offers a cost-effective yet let yet durable solution. Masonry is carried up to the fifth floor. The maximum allowed by this construction type to convey a sense of
permanence. Above the lighter attic story provides contrast and relief through refined details. Together, these elements offer early residents a complete and secure home even as the broader site continues to develop. Based on the master plan guiding
principles, we've divine defined the base, middle, and top. Activated the ground level through active ground floor uses while stepping down towards the Charles Town neighborhood. This is the existing view from Austin Street looking south. We'll take a look
around the site and the building design. The proposed perspective from the same corner presents a welcoming courtyard defined by a warm textured facade that establishes a sense of place. The top floor amenity aligns visually with the Bunker Hill monument, establishing a
connection with this prominent landmark. Broad pathways linked by streetscape markers will draw visitors into the site and foster engagement among residents and guests, seamlessly integrating the building within the broader context and
cultural context. The adjacent lawn and plaza are envisioned as a flexible community space supporting events such as touch a truck, arts festivals, farmers markets, and more. As the first to be built, the structure will stand alone for some time. It needs to feel
complete and resilient, anchored within an evolving site. The design is intentionally understated, a simple transitional envelope that doesn't demand attention, but sets a thoughtful tone for future phases where there's room for a more contemporary voice.
Views around the building highlight a robust robust masonry base with depth and articulation topped by a contemporary attic story. The corner entrance anchors the bike lounge, featuring large windows that showcase its use. Soldier coursing at Hudson
Sills reinforce regular window spacing. Along New Rutherford, windows convey a residential language referencing the neighborhood across the way. Responding to the site's large radius curbs, both buildings A and B feature faceted
corners that articulate their relationship to the site boundaries. The building massing is articulated by an inset volume that break that creates a visual break between forms. The lower shield volume along New Rutherford is distinctly separated from the taller
structure behind emphasizing a layered and dynamic composition. The facade depth is further enhanced by masonry patterns and cast stone bands providing a variety of textures near pedestrian scale. Following the grade at
the low point on the site here at the corner of Middle Road, planters will line the base of the building and protect the corner entrance at the shared path. Views around the building showcase robust materials with a two-story base expressed through paired vertical
windows seated on the caststone base. This regular rhythm of windows in a planer facade reflects a typical edge building character found throughout the Charles Town perimeter. We propose a contemporary masonry wrap with punched windows as a buffer to the
highway. The windows are sized for passive house construction, but they also limit views of traffic on the highway. As part of the building's envelope and systems, fresh air will be ducted to every bedroom. As these buildings are protective layer between
the highway and the open space fields, Kendra, you're a bit over halfway. H plenty of time. The lawn is designed to be enjoyed year round, offering flexible open space in all seasons. The adjacent parking areas can be repurposed for
community events or plaza use, enhancing the site's versatility. Our vision is for this to become a welcoming and active space, one that invites both residents and the broader Charles Town community to gather, relax, and connect.
And with that, thank you. Commissioners comments, Kendra, I would if you could leave your presentation up. Yeah. Want to reference it? Certainly. Just let me know what where you'd like
me to share. I think you can leave it on this image. Seeing no hands raised, I'll I'll just say that, you know, the diagram that you have of these shorter buildings, the call you
call them the shields and the L's in the back, um, is so prescriptive and makes me think of, you know, how this is going to get resolved, but it actually isn't resolved
in a way that I thought. I thought the L would just re render differently than the frontest piece. And maybe it does in the, you know, lack of texture on the back volume versus the front volume, but I don't think you're getting the reading
that that you were suggesting in the diagram by even just having what you call the attic floor or you referenced it as as the top floor. I just really wonder if
compositionally that just wants to be one piece that's distinct and again that's where you put all of the architectural emphasis and the back volumes that L shape becomes simpler could even become simpler in terms of
material um renditions it it this is this because building B is coming first I'm just worried that it's gonna to set the language for buildings A, C, and D. And
I thought that the diagram that you suggested um with those frontest pieces had a lot more promise that I'm seeing in the way you're you're resolving the material choices here. So you it seems that the front and the
the shield and the L would have uh taken more uh differentiation between the two. I Yes, that's what I was reading in in the diagrams. Thank you. Maybe what would be helpful is to go
also to that precedent page where you had um really close-ups of the precedents and your axon rendering because I really started to see you know pattern and texture and color that was
nice in the precedent images. Um and what's every one of them is distinct. The one on the, you know, far left is creating texture and pattern to reveal a pilaster approach. The second one in is a double order with a frame
set back. And I thought, you know, that could be an interesting approach. And the latter is really shifting windows that are connected by pattern. I I don't maybe these are all just suggested a brick, but I'm I'm some of those
strategies would be nice to see in what you're proposing here. Um that I'm not necessarily finding that tiein. Maybe we'll pass it on to David and see if he can help me out here.
Well, I I'm uh I'm glad you referred back to this um this image because I I was thinking about the same thing. And I think what there all three of those are different. Um and um more more detail,
more more uh precise detail, really elegant detail on the left and on the right quite simple and and punched. Um but regular on the left and sort of um sliding um masonry openings on the
right. Um the middle is probably my least favorite. But but but they're all good. Um they're all h they all have a strong strategy. The other thing they all have in common is u some vertical
proportions that um right I think I think really help um the the the just the the building wall. Um, and you know, when I look at the elevations on
the right, uh, the horizontally the bands of brick and the bands of mason reopening are I know they're not the same, but boy, they're really close. And they don't they don't create a kind of uh order about the
built just the simple building itself. Now, I know that I know that building on the left and and it's a beautiful building andully detailed and uh it's probably got detail in there of that would add significant cost to to where
you want to be. But I think it's more about the proportions of um of masonry openings in a brick wall. And you said you wanted to do this as passive house. And so you've got 30% of
the of the wall to open. Um but I think you can be um just more have a have a have a I think the way Mimi said it have an attitude about it that it's either going to be quite
formal and regular um and in some ways very traditional or it's going to be more active and and irregular. But without changing that that general proportion and and without having to do all that that detail. I think the you
know the other thing that so now go back to that view you had a moment ago. Um that was the view across the four buildings looking I guess from north to to south. Sure. Yeah. Um, and you got maybe it's the one
after this which is just a little bit closer in. And of course it makes you know these makes you wonder. I've got four buildings and we're looking at one building. And um I think what what Mimi
was suggesting was um that there's a way to think about the building envelope that reinforces the diagram. And I would describe the diagram this way, your your planning
diagram that there is along the service road and 93 um you're building a wall. I I don't mean that in a bad way at all. Um you're you're building a you're recognizing that I've got this enormous superructure
of 93. Um I've got a very unfriendly uh service road. Uh, it is what it is. And I'm I'm I'm making a wall. And in front of it, I'm building almost um um I'm building smaller.
Um I'm going to say I I wish the difference between the two heights was more, but I'm not going there. Um so that there's a wall and there's a pavilion. There's a wall and there's a a there's a hierarchy of these parts. And
if I look at all four buildings and I start to think that, okay, there's four walls and there's four pavilions. And I'm not suggesting that they're the same. I'm suggesting that they they have a a language. Um, and maybe the the wall
buildings um can be quite regular and the pavilions can be quite can be more irregular. And you're starting to do that in just in the geometry and the massing. Um, and I wonder if you just don't push that whole idea even farther.
And then the and then there's the the um connection between the two. And and I don't know if that's a third part, but it could be. And it could be different in the different buildings because they connect in in different ways according to the geometry of the site. Um and
almost as if there's a city side um that is of the material pallet of you know Main Street Charles Town and there's a infrastructure side that is a material pallet of of infrastructure and I don't
mean that in a I don't know in a any I mean I think that can be very powerful. I'm I'm actually thinking of of I'll give you a very specific example of when I was listening to Mimi and I was thinking
about um the building that um um on Harrison Avenue across the street from the cathedral. Um that is this beautifully detailed very simple um uh
horizontal uh corrugated metal clad building that I try drive past every single morning and uh and I've so I've looked at every detail on that building. Um, and the the the the contrast of those
two things, you know, if I looked at um the the the the building that was on the far left uh in your precedents and then the building that I'm talking about. Uh I I think that could really be quite an
exciting way to think about this. And all I all I'm suggesting I think all Mimi is suggesting is you've created a diagram in master plan. Um how do you take that into the whole thing? How do you how you take that diagram and make
it architecture? you know, if if and and maybe it's a way of saying I I um I don't know if there's well I I probably shouldn't go there, but I will anyway that that there's that 60% or 70% of the actual building mass
is of a of a more um of a of a very um tight uh building envelope budget. And then those these four pavilions that face Charles Town, that face the town um are are of a different budget and and
rather than taking it and smearing it across the whole thing. Yeah, I think that's exactly what I was trying to suggest too, David, and I'm glad you were clear about that. I think putting, you know, the details and the really
emphasis on the pavilion shields, whatever we want to call them, is really um a really smart strategy. And then the wall portion can be pretty simple. Um, and I don't know that it has to be brick because I do know that these projects
really require tight budgets and so maybe that's becomes a simpler material. Um but but that horizontal datim at the top of the fifth floor honestly is I think the thing that really um doesn't
support your idea. Um and I I just wonder if it just should just be all one material color at the front to red brick and then all the back for instance could be a buff or a different material. And I I just wonder if that helps distinguish
the special part from the more, you know, fabric part of your building. How do you feel this should relate to the Charles Town context if we're I mean, it's a new building. It's across,
you know, a great chasm, right? Rutherford is a big a big separation, but we really are we're trying to connect this to the larger neighborhood. This is going to be 123 new affordable apartments, uh the first building out of
the gate. How do you think that this can relate to the large to the the uh residential and commercial neighborhood nearby? Yeah, I mean, I think it's a good question. And I'm not sure that I would, you know, have chosen every one of these
images as as speaking to Charles Town, but I do think in your material choices, you've already started to talk about how to tie in with those lower volumes being the the brick materials. Not every one of these has a base, middle, and top.
Um, most of them do. I I will acknowledge that. But I think Mhm. it can be interpreted, right? Mhm. Yeah. Like the historic Charles Town has a a
materiality that's consistent from, you know, the the base up that is actually, but it has a very distinctive approach to the apertures at the top level that very much says top um but not
necessarily a material choice. or change, right? Or change. Okay. I I guess I'm I'm I I've been um I've been converted by Mark's um um vision of Memorial Drive.
And so I can imagine uh a future in which Memorial in which Brotherford Avenue is Memorial Drive and the buildings there are quite um um elegant and traditional in in their material pallet. And yet I've still got this
monstrous 93 thing behind me and and okay that's that's you know that's the edge of the of the neighborhood and I I can be I can have a a city side. You've stepped down the scale. You've reduced the footprint on that side. You've made
these smaller pieces which are all good things. And then I've and then I've got to but I've got to I've got to build an edge against that fearsome I93. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And Kendra, I think you even talked about the relationship to
Cambridge Crossing, which, you know, those buildings don't at all, you know, they're they're very modern in their language and and maybe you don't want to go there for the back bars, but I think that gives you a little bit of an alibi
to be, you know, contextual to that. And then the smaller buildings, you know, are the ones, the pavilion pieces are the ones that do relate back to the fabric of Charles Town. I can see that. I could get behind that.
Thank you. Hey, commissioners, any other comments or should I see if there is any public testimony? I think sounds like we're ready for public testimony. Yeah. Yeah. I think so.
Okay. So, at this time, I'd like to invite uh any uh member of the public to uh contribute public testimony uh by raising your digital hand uh or if you are dialing in by phone uh to uh press
star 9 and then star six to mute, unmute yourself. Um please identify any relevant project affiliation information and keep your comments to two minutes. Is there any public testimony? Okay, commissioners. I am not seeing any
public testimony. So, I will conclude that part of the evening and uh turn it back to commissioners to talk next steps. I think there was a lot of good content and good discussion tonight um for the proponent to consider as they
move forward. So, I think we have to decide as a commission um what we'd like to do. I think there was a lot of good comments um that we heard tonight. I I do want to support Cess's idea for the master plan
because I was remiss in to even thinking about some guidelines, but that would be really really helpful because we may not see these buildings a C and D for you know a while. And just to remind ourselves of some of the guidelines and
I don't think that the guidelines are constraints. Uh so that would be really helpful to see next time. Um as far as the master plan discussion could I may I could I respond
because we've we've put forth what we think are master plan guiding principles here. And if I and I I could use I guess further um advice then if we're not conveying that clearly enough or going
into enough detail. Yeah. I I Kendra I don't think um there is enough I'm not seeing principles that we could latch on to and know how to direct future buildings in
the master plan portion. So, I think that would be and it'd be nice to show examples, Seth, of what we're referring to. I'm thinking of the LMA had some really good guiding principles. Um, but it might be helpful to think of
other examples. Yes, for sure. Yes. And we will uh certainly share with the proponent team some uh guidelines documents that we've uh worked on with other proponents for other ADC master plans as precedent
examples to riff off of. Yeah. Um Dorchester Bay. Yeah. Yep. Including Dorchester Bay City, 35 to 75 Morrisy um among others. Uh, and I I do want to mention that uh in the chat um there is
somebody who would like to offer public testimony but was not able to raise their hand before. Um, commissioners, if you're amendable to uh going back to public testimony for a minute. Sure. Okay. I'm not going to necessarily bring
up the slides here. Um, but Andrew Mcdana, I'm going to elevate you to co-host. Just give me one second. Okay, Andrew, you should be able to unmute yourself. Hi. Hi, everyone. Can you hear me? Yes,
we can. Great. Thank you. I apologize for my technical difficulties. Um, I am a longtime Charles Town resident. I walk past this site every week on my way to work. Um, I think this project as it is currently proposed is aesthetically pleasing, especially the simple masonry details. Um, I actually like the
differentiation that exists on the attic level here. Uh, but I do think that it's a matter of taste and so there's always going to be some disagreement about that. Um, I would be excited to see this project replace the pretty desolate parking lots that are currently on this site. Uh, I recently became a homeowner in Charles Town, but during the many
years that I rented in Boston, I would have loved to live in a complex like the one that's proposed here. Um, so I I urge the commission to expeditiously approve this project. Um, both because I think it's aesthetically very pleasing and fitting with neighborhood character and because we desperately need new
housing stock in Massachusetts. And this project seems as good or better than the vast majority of the existing housing stock. Um, I don't know the last time that uh any anyone has attempted to find a new place uh to rent or to buy, but um this this project, you know, even the ex
exterior uh seems great. Um, that's the opening testimony. Thank you. Thank you very much, Andrew. And before I move on, just want to confirm if there's any other public testimony. If anyone is having problems raising their
hand, you can put uh your desire to give testimony in the chat. Okay, commissioners, not seeing any more. I'll turn it back to you for further discussion. I mean, I was going to say, Seth, I think that the way this was set up today was very effective. So
as the project moves forward, I think having having both the principles of the master plan and then the kind of details of the project itself would would I would just
advocate to continue to do that as I imagine there'll be new parties viewing the project as we move forward. Um the only other request that I have is maybe if there is going to be such a long lapse of time between this phase and
future phases that we could see what the project looks like without those massings of buildings. And I know it's a tough thing to show, but it would be helpful to see um what that you know, we've all been on
projects where there's like future phases, but it just would be helpful to see how how that singular building works on its own. Um, so there were some nice perspectives you guys had where you showed the future buildings in gray and
it would be great to like zoom out a little bit and see the gray buildings removed and maybe some existing condition photos of what what you would actually see. Um, because maybe you'll need some screening or something like that in this first phase of work.
But I did appreciate kind of the discussion going back and forth between the kind of macro to the micro and then back to the macro. And I think that's going to make a stronger project. Okay, commissioners. Unless there are no
other comments. Um, at this time and in lie of a formal vote, it's my understanding that the proposal proposed project is recommended for additional review at design review subcommittee. Uh, there are no provisos at this meeting because there's no vote occurring, but I think there was a lot
of excellent feedback uh given today. Uh, the presentations will be made available on the website as will uh the recording uh on the city YouTube channel within a couple of days. Uh and with that, I'd like to thank uh the proponent this evening and thank the public for
joining us as well, of of course the commissioners for your time and dedication and helping to uh make the city a more beautiful place. Thank you all everybody. You Thank you very much. Good night. Thank you. Good night. Part: 2
Good evening everyone and thank you for joining us for a design subcommittee meeting of the Boston Civic Design Commission. Today's date is Tuesday, June 17th and this is session B of the BCDC design subcommittee. The planning department continues hosting public
meetings in a virtual setting for the health, safety, and accessibility of Boston residents. I'm Christina Rico, executive director of the BCDC. And before we begin with the with the agenda, I'm required by 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. Um and for the record of this evening, we are joined by commissioners um Gillies Smith, Hine, and Solano. Tonight's agenda will include presentations for projects at 75 and 75A
Morsy Boulevard. in Dorchester, also known as 3575 Marcy Boulevard, phase 1, and 305 Brookline Avenue, Longwood Medical Area, also known as Longwood Place Phase 1. Tonight's meetings proceedings will follow the typical BCDC
design subcommittee format, beginning with a brief presentation from the proponent, followed by comments from the commissioners and public testimony. Um, and please give me one moment while I promote our first group to uh co-host here.
All right. Is there anyone from the proponent team who's here that needs to be promoted that I've not already promoted? If you could raise your hand, that would be helpful. Okay. A quick introduction to the project. The proposed project contemplates the
development of approximately 645,000 square feet of primarily residential uses, 24,000 square feet of open space, and 414 off- streetet parking spaces in two buildings on an approximately 2.25 acre site consistent with PDA number
146. This will be the third presentation of the project to the commission follow its introduction at the monthly meeting on April 1st and a subsequent design subcommittee meeting on May 13th of this year. The commission previously reviewed aspects of the project as part of the 3575 Mars Boulevard PDA master plan
approved by the board in December 2023. A quick reminder to the proponent that presentations will be limited to 15 minutes and I'll give you a quick two-minute warning um when you come down to the end of it. Uh and with that, I invite the proponent team to begin presenting whenever ready.
Great. Thank you, Christina. Can you all see my screen? We can. Great. Thank you. I want to first by saying thank you to the commissioners for providing really fantastic feedback in our first session. We've worked closely with uh the Boston
Planning Department urban design group to incorporate that feedback into the revised design that we'll be sharing with you today. Um we'll be focusing on five major areas of the design starting with the flow from Morrisy Boulevard to the community park really opening up that threshold to invite folks into the
site. We'll be we'll then go to the southwest corner of building B looking at alleviating this um sort of pinch point of the community park and opening up that aperture um to to better kind of rightsize the park there. We'll then make our way to the south of the
building looking at ways that we've broken down that massing and and revise the expression to to mitigate the scale of the building um and add some more activation along the south side of the building there. We'll take a look at the lobbies for both buildings, but really focusing on design updates to the lobby of building
A. And then we'll round out the presentation by looking at the facades of both buildings. Um, ways to create more movement and more of a residential feel in the body of the tower based on the feedback that we heard. Starting with the flow from Morsy
Boulevard. Um, you know, we heard some really great feedback on ways to create more movement into the site along this kind of narrow threshold of of the site here. And really the the main kind of takeaway that we we heard and worked through with Austin Planning Department
urban design group was to open up this corner a bit more, pull that that uh podium volume back and and create more public realm in the um in the sidewalk there. So that's that's precisely what we've done. We've reduced that podium expression here, you can see on the left
in our previous scheme, and pulled it away from the corner here to create more plava space, more of a sidewalk dimension here. And that allows the tower to run down to ground and really create that gateway expression into the
site, that moment of differentiation in the podium where that tower breaks the plane and comes down to grade. Um, as a secondary move, what this does is it reduces some of the the pressure on this loading dock area where that tower was previously the only thing coming to
ground and really gives the hierarchy to that prominent face at the retail expression there. Here's a look at that same kind of before and after looking at the corner of Morsy Boulevard and A Street. You can see we've really added a lot um some
more dimension here at this corner and created some spillout space for the retail so that as you're coming around this corner moving from the north you get a sense that there's something around this corner that's inviting you in and moving you into the site. We've added more dimension at the a street cross-section here.
And then we've additionally moved that lobby volume in the back um of this view further back to open up that aperture into the um community park as well. So really doing a few things to help invite folks into the site and open up view
corridors into that that space in the building and and that community park beyond. As we zoom back out and look at how this indaes with the context and the surroundings, you can see we're we're picking up on that uh cornis line of the
existing masonry band of South Line and carrying that through for the podium. So creating some kind of a continuous datam of of of moves across the site and tying into the context and then creating that moment where it that breaks and drops down to create a special moment of
engagement with the site here at the corner. This, you know, as the master plan further builds out, creates a nice opportunity to create a corresponding move across the way and really emphasize this moment as a gateway into the site here from from Morsy Boulevard.
You know, there's language in the existing MPDA that calls for the moves similar to what we're doing here. So, I think we're we're all working towards a a positive moment that creates some engagement and activation on this gateway portion of the site. As we make our way around into the
corner here, here you're seeing that reduction of the podium scale at at the corner here. Really that tower coming to ground, creating that gateway moment. Um, and again, another kind of representation of how we're eroding that corner to create more public realm
and then stepping back that lobby volume to create more of an aperture into the into the community park. So really that that lobby volume becomes its own kind of special element whereas previously we were trying to tie it into the the um tower language putting too much emphasis
on that loading dock door. As we make our way to the southwest corner of building B, uh we heard that, you know, this this pinch point and this kind of representation of the building here really felt out of place. um that really that should this this uh face of
the building should be running parallel to the other three primary faces of the uh buildings that face onto the community park. So we did just that. We we've reoriented that face of the building to be parallel to the main kind of lobby um footprint.
So now all of those planes are working in unison together. And we've changed the representation of this facade to be that more kind of slender bookend representation of facade type A. So that glassy kind of um facade terminating the the body of the
building. Here we've added further definition and erosion of the community space at the ground level. So we're creating these moments where you can traverse underneath the building, walk in and around the landscape and create these
kind of special carveouts for for seating for um kind of moments of respit just to create some more engagement between the indoor outdoor experience of um that community space program. Creating kind of a special moment there. Still maintaining those larger format
doors to uh further activate the space based on the program use. Here you can see a revised site plan of the two buildings together. So again reinforcing that idea that we've we've made that face parallel to the lobby
facade and have opened up that aperture of the community park to be consistent with the uh body of the the buildings here. What this move also does is it sort of um orients people towards the uh courtyard of South Line, whereas
previously we were kind of running people into the the kind of unactivated and um minimized uh parking uh facade of South Line there. So again, a positive move here um for both the community space and also the context to to create
some movement between the two uh sites here. Uh what this move does as well is it maintains that um that moment where we're we're creating some presence of that community space facade on access with Main Street. So again, you know,
some of the moves that were working before we've been able to maintain um as part of this change as well. So overall, I think, you know, a good story um for the evolution of this building. By reorienting that facade as well, we've kind of reduced that um that area
of facade that's parallel to a street as well. So, the building feels a little bit more slender from this this vantage point. Moving on to the south facade of building B. Uh you know, we did hear that this facade was or this, you know, view of the building was feeling a
little bit bulky. So we were asked and and um challenged to find ways to make this a little bit more slender and and a little bit more activated as well. You know, this is kind of the back end of the building. So ways to create some activation here. Um, and what we what we
did is we've um created another moment where that bookend facade uh makes its way into the building and actually dropped a portion of that down to create some activation um in the community center in civic space on the ground floor. So, kind of a
secondary entrance off of um the South Line Service Drive here to invite folks into the site who are walking up Morrisy Boulevard from the south. So another moment of activation there. Um by doing this we also uh got the opportunity to
create a natural break between that threetory and twotory podium expression as it kind of steps down towards the uh open space. So overall a very nice kind of organizing feature for the building here that creates some activation and and better kind of rationalizes some of
the design moves that we were starting to make um the first time around. Here's another view uh walking up. This is that southline service drive. As you can see, you know, where we were previously having a um a continuous unactivated
wall, we've created a moment of respit on this um this pathway to the community space, a moment of entry and activation that again kind of helps to soften this edge um of the building.
Here you can see a revised plan of building B that shows all of the moves that I mentioned to date uh on on this this floor plan. So again that activation of the community space kind of pulling that program over um to create kind of this
through connection to the community civic space from the south eroding that corner to create some indoor outdoor activation moments of seating underneath the building. kind of that front porch concept that was discussed last time. Um, eroding the corner of the podium at
Morris C and A Street to create more public realm and then stepping that building back as you walk up a street to open up your sight lines into the community park. On the lobby of building A, you know, we did hear that this portal, this lobby
expression felt like it was slipping a little bit, a little bit kind of tenuous. um relationship to the tower above. Uh so what we did was we we've abandoned that kind of idea of kind of pulling and curving the facade over to orient the lobby towards a street and
we're running that facade now parallel to the primary face of the tower above. Uh we're still lifting the tower to create that special moment of lobby expression underneath. um but really kind of quieting it down and making it relate more to the um the
massing of the building above. We are returning that podium expression to the tower to make that feel a little bit more robust. That was some feedback that we heard from the Boston planning department. And we're turning that corner of the glass so that it engages both a street
and the park. kind of having an address off of a street as a need for the building as well as that engagement off the park and unifying that with a um a canopy that wraps the corner here. So it kind of engages both uh sides of the
building. So this move that we've introduced at building A is similar to what we were already employing at building B. So now you know going back to that conversation of the buildings having similar expressions or different differentiating in some areas we can say that the
lobbies of these buildings are very much in the brother sister vocabulary. You know they're sharing kind of the the um canopy expression. They're sharing the fact that they're kind of uh wrapping the corners of both buildings along the community park and a similar kind of
facade treatment with that glass with maybe a um accent kind of cap on it to create kind of a special language um at that that program use. So, two two rendered views of what I just mentioned um on that language of
the canopy of of the um the lobbies with that canopy expression that kind of twotory reading of the uh lobbies to create that special moment and a moment of hierarchy compared to the rest of the building. Moving
on to the facades and this is a little bit of a a rehash of what we discussed last time but both buildings massings relating more to the the context. Um so building A having this curve of linear form that is informed by the highway
that kind of broad sweep of I93 making itself known in the building of uh building A. And then building B reoriented to hold the corner and hold the street wall of Morsy Boulevard. That very kind of orthogonal view uh massing
orientation. Um and then breaking down that language with a series of steps that steps down to the community park. So, we discussed last time, you know, moments where the building's tied together, having a shared language of that facade type A, where that slender bookend facade, um, and a shared
language of that podium expression, but then differentiating in that facade type B, uh, where building A is kind of this very kind of horizontal reading along the highway and on the other faces, and then building B having more of a a vertical expression that relates to the
stepping of the building. Um, so this is what we shared last time. You know, we heard that um we we we should employ more animation and more movement in the facades of this building and make them feel more residential primarily down here at the podium where
we have um you know, we employed this kind of brick frame that had glass infill that felt maybe a little bit too commercial. So, starting with the podium, we've moved to a more brick infill um within the peers of the podium
as well, um to create more of a a residential scale. So, here you can see that we're starting to, you know, identify living rooms versus bedrooms within that brick language um to create more of a kind of residential feel. We're starting to pronounce the
operables a little bit more, too. You know, again, kind of a key residential feature with access to fresh air and then introducing more of that accent panel language to tie into the tower, too. On the facades, we've dropped out one of
the accent panels per floor in a stack here to create more movement in the building. So, you can see here, um, we have that little bit of a subtle dancing effect of the tower. Um, and when you look at that at the building form, you
can see it's this very kind of um, you know, clear diagram of that that panel kind of tracing back and forth in a stack here to create some subtle movement within the the overall language of the building. And that kind of reinforces the overall
massings of the building as these interlocking forms as they are um, kind of encapsulated by this larger frame element that traces each volume. So that would be on the Moresy side as well as on the interior of the the building here facing the park. That kind
of secondary facade type B language with the dropped out metal panel um accent that uh kind of dances up the building and creates some movement uh subtly. All kind of framed by that book end of facade type A that that um encapsulates
the ends of the building. on building A along the highway um in that that plane you know we were also asked to create a little bit more um movement within the facade as well. So we looked at um you know where we previously had a very kind of uniform
accent panel that was this symmetrical kind of triangle movement um flipping the orientation in certain areas to create kind of a a dancing effect up the building. So you can see here in the diagram changing the orientation uh per stack so
that there's more movement and animation as kind of the sun traces across the building. It's catching accent panels in a certain uh light in certain times of the day just to create some more um differentiation in the accent panel of the building. So be on the highway as well as on the inside face of the
building. Um kind of that diagram of movement across the facade. Um and I have the two-minute warning. So, I'm going to go a little bit quicker. Uh, just an overall view of the buildings with that revised facade language. So, again, more movement in in facade type B for building B. And then along the
highway of facade type A for or facade type B for building A, um, you can see those moments where there's more of a dense kind of shadow line in the building kind of wrapping up the building here. Um, so from here I'm going to flip it to Carl with Arcadus to Can we could we maybe just spend one uh one minute on
the architecture before we jump into the landscape, Christina? I don't know if that's okay. Um, sure. Um, Joe, I am really pleased. I I really I I really
almost have nothing to say. I think that you did exactly um I mean I'm sure a lot of this development was going to happen anyway, but I think that the clarity of the facades, the diagram, um everything about the massing
um is just so much clearer. And I'm I'm I really want to thank you because this is a lot of work and you turned it around really quickly. And I I I I just really want to acknowledge um uh how I think significant some of these changes
are um and how uh much more uh of a community of buildings this feels like. Even though they're different, they're they have commonalities. And um I think that the move to pull the base back on
building B um uh and how that actually um cascaded around the building is really super successful. I appreciate the break uh facing the u adjacent development south line. Um I think that
really helps on that side too and you will see it. Um and uh also the the red definition of units on the the base buildings uh really makes these buildings land I think a lot more
comfortably. So I I don't know um how my uh how the other commissioners feel but I I really think this has been very successful evolution and um I think the only thing that I would say is that as you develop this when I see these
renderings um the base and materials feel warmer than u some of the earlier um looser renderings and I hope you follow up on that because I think that the warmth of the browns and the the bronzes and stuff
like that um is really making the project feel a lot more residential and uh a lot friendlier and in some ways related uh loosely um to the the uh materiality of Southline and sets up I
think a precedent for the buildings that you know to come. So I'm I'm just really I'm I'm really pleased. So um that's why I wanted to interrupt because I don't know what we'll be talking about what issues will be arising in the landscape but I I think this really has worked out
very well. That's great. Thank you so much. I might as well just jump in on a couple of things about about the architecture. I haven't seen this since full commission and it's a it it seems like an entirely different project quite frankly. in in the first project um the pieces
really didn't seem to be talking to each other and and I think a lot of the moves um you know the stepping down and stepping back and the elegance of pieces that you've decided to bring down to the ground to give a slenderness to the to the massing is actually really nice um
which also then it brings an emphasis to to the podium areas where where and I I thought that the you know one of the very convincing things that that I thought was the um the two lobbies, the views of the two the two lobbies where
they do look like brother and sister um and and um and there is a commonality but they don't look the same and and I think that that's a very very elegant solution. The only thing that I would actually ask as you go forward to test, I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but
the dancing facade on that one building is dancing so much it's very hard for me to look at it. So, I just would say test it to make sure that that No, it was it was this one. This one here. Yeah. I don't know about other people's eyes,
but I find it actually pretty hard to look at. It may not be that in in real life. Um, it could be that some things should line up and some things should move and that might that might help u because it does give a little bit of an optical illusion
thing. I think I know what you're after, but it could be that, you know, what if the slender pieces, you know, actually were continuous and the larger pieces weren't. It might be just something to study. Um, uh, sure. that the blue one also when you go back to the one
previous one that also has a very strong that diagram too. So I I I agree. I think this is there's a kind of a bulbous sort of um very distorting effect in at least in the round. So anyway, yeah, it's helpful feedback. We'll check
that out. But elegant is the key word here that Shauna pulled out. I think the pro the the massing and the the the whole development looks just a the proportions are really a lot more elegant. Um, so I think that's fantastic.
I think everything that you've done relative to the way that the building hits the ground has um quite an impact though subtle on the landscape in terms of sort of giving each a little more
room and breath. Um, and it helps with the landscape because the landscape have a lot of moving parts and I think those now feel complimentary as opposed to the building just sort of sitting um next to the landscape. They feel much
more integrated. Um, I do have some comments on the landscape from looking at the presentation earlier. Um, but I think that uh Shauna and David have really spoken well. to what is what feels very rich. So, thank you for that.
That was fast, too. Joe, do you think that we could pass the presentation maybe to Carl to cover the fortune of landscape before Commissioner Solano before you jump in with Yep. more detailed commentary? Absolutely. Great.
Thanks, Joe. Um Carl fresh hour with Arcadus and uh what you're seeing on the slide here is the previous design um which is after the design you saw Shauna. So it um so it's the second iteration and um some of the comments
and feedback we got from uh staff were as Joe mentioned the corner of Morsy and A Street trying to figure out a way to bring in the landscape from Morsy into the neighborhood and really create sight lines into the streetscape and then in
the background into the park. Um, another comment that Laurel was alluding to is that to really work hard with the architecture in the lobbies and really have the landscape complement the architecture and find ways to really
organize the spaces to have meaning to the entries as well as the forms and the uses of the landscape. Um, I think we all agreed collectively that the shade structure in the middle of the park was providing a little bit of tension um as
its adjacency to the the pinch point of tower A and tower B. um as we studied that and then you know just really thinking about opportunities to create um landform and mounding to really
create spaces of discovery and also areas of respit as you're moving through the space. So we we took those in mind. Um, next slide, Jill. And and just to reiterate that the community park today
um and in phase one will serve as not only a respit or an open space for the residents and visitors to this neighborhood but also a a green connection from the neighborhood of Savin Hill through South Line along
Moresy up to the T-top and then the alternate way coming down Moresy through the community park through South Line and then onto Sabin house. So, so it'll serve as that today and then in the future it's one of many open spaces in
this open space network for this new uh development within the neighborhood. So, next slide, Joe. Um so, uh the plan on the left is the previous design that we um presented last time. Uh you can see
that the tower B has the north south orthogonal facade um as well as the shade structure is central and then we also had a planter that was attached kind of to lobby B um which wasn't
really uh reiterating our design principles of maintaining urbanity having clean crisp edges and urban edges along the facades. Um and so we went back and we studied that as well. And uh
the current design on the right shows the new architectural expression on the tower B community um uh and civic area as well as the uh updated entry point on tower A. And so we worked with CBT to
really study the path of travel, sight lines, and the variety of spaces to create these moments of green that drew pedestrians into what we were calling the gateway plaza at the edge of a
street. And then a sequence of these spaces or little eddies as you move through the park itself. Um, we did take out the shade structure, but we still kept what we thought was important, a two-step raised platform, so we could
still have performances and create an edge to the open lawn space, but not a barrier. So, it served as something that could really create a space within a space. Um and then as Joe presented as well uh along tower B at the community
and civic space, the dash line shows a canopy um that is on the the civic space and it created opportunity where we could get good sight lines into the entry but also pedestrians could move underneath the space and we had opportunity to hang the porch swings
from the underside of that structure to really create that that front porch feel. And as well as we created an expanded overspill space for the community center where we could have tables and chairs out in the space dayto-day or potentially easels out for
a neighborhood gallery. Um and just creating some more functional spaces. Um and then as you'll see in some of the perspectives, we really started to work with sculpting and crafting some of the um planters to really create these views and dappled light within the space.
So, next slide, Joe. Um, this is just a quick diagram that shows uh we had a diagram before that this this is a community park, but there are rooms within rooms. So, there's the Gateway Plaza, which we see as more of this active urban edge with a light
installation or something that really captures attention and animation is more of an urban plaza. And then the next layer or room within the park is more of it's starting to become more of a intimate space. We do have the performance area, but daytoday you could
sit on one side and read a book or have lunch and then seating with underneath the shade of shade trees in the deck area. Yep. And then more of the open community lawn space is the central largest part and it's intentionally
adjacent to the civic and community center. So there's that opportunity for a lot of activity and animation on the space. And then to the plan left um is a active edge along the amenity space where there's opportunity for overspill
seating, but then a little grove of trees and and little pathways that really start to come back into the main pathway. So, it doesn't feel privatized, but there's also these areas of discovery and then continues movement to the southline uh courtyard.
Next slide, Joe. So, this is a view with my back towards A Street. Tower B is on the left. Tower A is on the right. And what we've done is we've created these large planters that move through the space creating opportunity for seating
um as well as creating these moments of movement through the space. We pulled the planter in the foreground away from the lobby of tower B. So you could actually move behind it and still have this this layering of the plant material and really looking at using a lot of
textures and colors and variety of plant material to really uh enhance the experience. Next slide, Joe. Now this is looking back towards tower B with a gateway plaza in the center of the
rendering. Tower A lobby is to the right and you can start to see the layering of the space uh as your mo your eye moves through. Um in the very background you can see the Yep. the porch swings uh hanging from the canopy in off of the
community space and then the lawn is uh center right there. Next slide, Joe. Oh. Oh yeah. This is a uh the slide from the community center with the folding doors on maybe a gallery night or an
instructional art uh event that might happen in the community uh sitting underneath the canopy of the shade tree to the plan left and then you can start to see the layering of these spaces within the overall park. So there's a
variety of passes passive spaces but also opportunity for active spaces and then also functioning as movement through the park as well. Next slide. Uh this is a shot from the lawn uh from the backside of the lawn and and this is
what I was referring to earlier. You can see the two steps of the uh the performance deck there. It really holds the edge of the space, but it doesn't create a barrier. So, it's it's really a nice play on that edge. And as you move
clockwise around the space, we'll start to burm up with the plant material and creating this more of this intimate space and a protected space. Um, as you're sitting in the aderond chairs looking back, next slide, Joe.
And this shows um my back towards South Line. Service Drive is up on the bottom of the plan. And it shows how we're mounding some of these land forms and rolling them down. And even though the pathways are close together, there's still opportunities to just slowly
meander through these pathways to to look at different types of vegetation, some um beehive locations, and then really creating a plant palette that has flowering trees, flowering shrubs, and a
variety of textures and colors. And on the left, because we are dealing with the grade change, um there are stairs moving up to that active edge, but then we're sloping up to get to the elevation of the overall park. Next slide, Joe.
And uh this is a bird's eye hovering over uh a street. And it's just looking back over the the B space and and it's kind of just this collection of of open spaces and intimate urban open spaces
and and creating a variety of spaces, but also some active use as well. I think that's it for the slides, J. Yep, that's it. Great. Thank you. Yeah, really informative.
Um, could we go back to a site plan? Just the one that shows the current and not not the compare. I think it's Do you have one that is just the plan on the on the right hand side?
Carl, do we have that? See um Laura, do you want the uh overall site plan? Yes. If you The next slide is the diagram, but it shows the entirety of Oh, you know what? Then go back. I think that this will be just as uh useful then. But
thank you. And hang on a second. There we go. So, one of the things that is so nice about this now is that spaces that
belong to each building are different which is lovely and united by the center and making that small move which I actually wasn't a small move in the
architecture here has really helped this side. I always felt that this side was really pretty great and energized and this now is its um cousin in a nice way.
So I I appreciate that. There's there is one thing that I that I will say. Could we um could we maybe zoom into this area? Not not too much. That's perfect.
In fact, go maybe go a click back or so. How's that? Perfect. I hadn't seen this before. Um I know this is where the lighting is right in this area and the the crosswalks that go
to the sidewalks across the street. M I can't help but feel that maybe this area might do some good if you're driving down this street to have this actually
be um a planter or a tree area or something green so that when you're coming down you actually feel connected and kind of scooped into that landscape
and I don't know what scale that is. I don't but it it feels to me like this which will be you know if it really becomes something like lighting it will be attractive no matter what's in front of it in fact it'll feel a little more
mysterious if it sort of has a frontest peep and you don't see it coming down. Now, I know that means you have to turn the dial on the other spaces on or on the other planters, but I don't think a lot and I don't I mean, I've drawn this
very big and I don't mean it to be big at all as much as like let the these be the scoops that come in and let this be what you see as you're coming down the street. And it might
help with really feeling more connected with that future civic space like it has a beginning and end that is connected to this to this area. So that's something that I would study to see whether or not it it makes sense and whether or not in
fact it might improve the the connection at the door here as well. Sure. So, something to examine. I think um the the I will say about the architecture that this I'm I'm less
convinced about this. I'd love to look at that for just a second and understand why I'm unconvinced about it. Um, is there a specific That's perfect. That's perfect. And I I think what you've done is actually great. And they
do feel like they're of a common language. And this may have to do with the way that the landscape is arranged around that that entrance more than anything else. But I feel like this is very clear and this helps to make this
clear, but it's it's not quite as clear as this. And mind you, they're on located on, you know, different sides of the building. They're not both towards a street. Right. So, Shauna, did you want to say something about that?
Um, I I saw your That's why I'm asking. No, no, no, don't. No, I do. I will comment on the landscape but not not thanks. Okay. And then just one more thing if we could look at the perspective of the lawn looking.
One more. The lawn. Yeah. This one. Yeah. There you go. Um you have one more looking in the other direction. And by the way, I like the steps. I think you're right. It does really help to stop that to kind of hold the lawn. There's one where you're kind of looking
here and looking back. Let's see if we have that one. Carl, do we have that one? The community center. Yeah. Back one more. This one. Oh, I'm sorry. Go to the next one where the orange chairs are. Yeah. I
I still I I so appreciate what you've done with the topography over here that that kind of holds the space. And I wonder if you don't want to wrap that around and let these chairs be arased off of the lawn as well. In other words,
that land form starts to feel like it's really doing the holding of that entire edge of the lawn and that those lawn chairs get to be raised a little as a result of that. So it's
flat and then it goes up just to draw kind of a bad section of it. That's interesting. Yeah. So, so that I just think it would be so nice at one point to be higher than everything else. And
then from the the backside, it kind of helps to um actually make those mounds that are behind this even more interesting from the other side because now you have some slope to play with as well. But it's I mean those are really
minor comments. I think this is so successful in so many ways. And I'm remembering back to the master plan. I can't even remember how long it was, but it was a long time ago. And boy, just the ideas and the buildings have just,
you know, developed so wonderfully together, which I'm I'm really encouraged by. So that's those are my comments. Thank you. And I I'll just jump in on a couple of comments on the landscape. First of all, Carl, I think it is I
think it's really lovely. I think you've developed a number of really very rich spaces. Um, I I I appreciate Lauren's suggestion about the potential raising of the um of the seating area because I think with the planting covering the
landforms, you don't necessarily notice the landforms as much and so having some of that spatial experience. I think these I have some sort of minor things that you can think about going forward, but overall I think it's extremely successful. I find that there's an
awkwardness between the seating ed Eddie and the performance um stage the performance steps at least in plan. We don't have any views of it. I don't know if the geometry of you know of the seating Eddie needs to change a little bit if the seating Eddie needs to
push away from that other but it feels a little tight and constricted. So I I would and I don't know if the seeding steps should be a little bit longer than they are currently. Um so so that's something you can kind of look at going going forward. The other element that
that I would say um and again this is definitely a development. If you go to 36, there's a lot of really great things here, but there's a lot of different languages going on. And then if you click also to we'll go to 40 in a
second. And so just thinking, you know, sometimes the the planters are, you know, here they're super skinny, the other side they're fat, then we've got the small orange ones and the boulders going through. And so there's a lot of different landscape languages. I'm not saying it should be homogeneous, but
there's maybe too many from my perspective. And you know this is again this is beyond you know the taking care of the public realm because you're doing an elegant job of of achieving a very rich public realm. But that's just something that you know that I would think about sort of going
forward in in the in the refinement of the design. Good point. Thank you. Commissioners, can I ask for public comment folks? Please. Okay. Great.
Uh, at this time we'd like to invite any members of the public in attendance who may wish to contribute public testimony to raise your digital hand and I'll call on you. If you're calling in by phone, dial star 9 to activate the raise hand function and star six to mute and unmute yourself. Please state your name and any
relevant project affiliation information. And please keep comments to two minutes. I'm just scrolling down the list of participants here. I see no hands raised. Okay. So, commissioners, I'll close the comment period and suggest that we
discuss next steps. Well, I mean, um I didn't say anything about the landscape, but I like I think the the landscape is um form is just so much more coherent like all everything else we discussed. I think this looks great and I think it's ready to be brought back to the
full commission. I would agree. Great. Um, that seems clear to me. So, we will, um, work with the proponent and the project manager and get this on the agenda for final review and recommendation at the next full commission meeting. Thanks to the
proponents. Thank you so much for your comments. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Appreciate it. All righty. We are running just uh 7 minutes ahead and I happen to see that the Longwood Place proponent team has already signed
on and been promoted to co-host. So just a quick introduction to the project and then I'll turn it over to them for presentation. A proposed project at uh 305 Brookline Avenue al um Longwood Medical Area also known as Longwood Place Phase 1 seeking
ADB entitlement contemplates the development of uh phase one of Longwood Place. The project includes 1,43,000 ft of mixed uses and 520 garage parking spaces in three buildings on a portion of a 5.9 acre site in accordance with
PDA 134. Uh, consistent with article AD and BCDC reform efforts which will be formalized in August, the planning department is testing meeting limits with this project intended to align the review timelines of the department and this commission. This project may appear
before the commission at up to five meetings as was um discussed at its introduction. This will be the second presentation of the project to the commission following its introduction at the May 6th meeting. The commission previously reviewed the Longwood Place PDA development plan, which the BPDA
board approved in January 19th, 2023. And a reminder to proponent team that the presentation will be limited to 15 minutes, and I'll give you a two-minute warning when you approach the end of that. And with that, I invite the proponent team to begin presenting whenever ready. Emily, hi. We can't hear you. Yes. Can
you hear me now? We can. Go ahead. I'm sorry. There are so many buttons to push sometimes. Uh good evening, commissioners. Thank you so much for your time this evening. Uh today's agenda, as Christina sort of alluded to, um we'll focus on landscape architecture and public realm. We will review the
design guidelines from the project PDA and then share how phase one is beginning to implement those guidelines. Uh the project again as Christina mentioned was uh before the full commission on May 6th and together with some feedback from the commissioners, feedback from staff. We've developed a
projected framework for our BCDC progress uh going forward process, excuse me. It anticipates three meetings. Tonight's meeting focuses on again landscape architecture and urban design with the next meeting focusing on the building design.
U I'm just going to briefly walk through our project context and the thesis of the open space is really this that the medical institutions of the Longwood Medical Area have no outdoor space uh really and the academic institutions uh Emanuel and Simmons Windsor school
Harvard Medical School have outdoor space but it's largely privatized. So, Longwood Place has the goal of providing a perial permeable public realm and open space for all. The heart in particular will provide a type of missing open
space from the LMA, a place of respit that's open, welcoming for residents, workers, and visitors to the LMA. In addition to the goal of providing publicly accessible open space, the framework for from the master the framework of the master plan really grew
from uh creating pedestrian connections within and through the site to the emerald necklace. In these views of the project model, you can see the relationship of the proposed buildings to Brookline A in this image on the left and on the images uh in the
images on the right, the relationship of the proposed buildings to the riverway. The design guidelines that were established as part of the PDA were organized into three parts. Today's agenda covers public realm and landscape with uh the next meeting covering
building buildings and massings. Starting with the public realm, the design guidelines define how buildings meet the ground by addressing the need for active programming and building entries that are both accessible and legible. At the ground floor, buildings should
engage the public realm using setbacks, architectural canopies, and transparency. The design guidelines also define two specific spaces for phase one. The first is a front porch, a covered exterior
open space located in the residential building immediately adjacent to the heart. And the second is the forum, a 5,000 square foot community space also immediately adjacent to the heart. This space located in commercial building C1.
And in this phase one, the proposed uh ground floor plan, we're we're illustrating how the design guidelines are translated across all three of these buildings. first as you can see in the yellow, orange, red, and purple. Um,
active transparent building edges extend all throughout the public realm on all sides of the heart. The central connector in Brooklyn Avenue. Phase one also delivers the front porch. You can see here it's shaped by the R1 building and the main heart. and it delivers the
forum that um that community space that's got transparency on three sides. The heart, the connector and the vico. Additionally, a comprehensive retail strategy across the entirety of the site will be guided by a single consultant
and that'll reinforce this cohesive experience, a cohesive retail experience uh especially centered around the main heart. In this perspective view of the heart, you can start to see the relationship of the building bases to each other. They are all lifted to extend the public
realm and create a welcoming gesture that connects the active uses of the buildings to the open space and the landscape architecture. They share a consistent horizontal architectural datim um and and expose the building structure at the you where they ground
where the buildings come to the ground to recognize a pedestrian scale and visually tie the buildings together. We've prepared an animation that shows a little bit more detail of the ground floor, but I'm first going to hand it off to Philip at Sasaki to talk about landscape architecture. Great. Thank
you, Emily. So next we're going to talk about the landscape design guidelines that were developed uh during the PDA. Um next slide. So if we thinking about this, the PDA guidelines lays out the approach to the hierarchy of open spaces for landscape in particular the
relationship around the main heart, how it connects to the connector and then eventually how it connects to phase 2 and the passive green. So recognizing the importance of Longwood Place within the wider LMA neighborhood, the guidelines really calls for a diversity of open spaces and
experience uh but with the largest open space being the main heart and as Emily mentioned earlier, the relationship with the ground floor uses of those adjacent buildings. The main heart is positioned uh at the southern anchor point along Brookline.
Um it's framed by residential office and lab with ground for retail, has healthc care to the south and the Windsor school to the north. So this is really a truly civic space rarely found in the city and is meant to function uh both during the day as program space but also when the
the open space is not programmed. The connector supports the circulation between each building and it's a space that links the main heart to the other anchor space on the the northern end of the site, the the passive green. And then there's the the passive green
itself. This shall anchor the northern part of the site. This is a quiet rest bit for residents of the neighborhood. It'll be delivered in a future phase of the project, but the ideas and principles of this space should also be included throughout phase one of the project.
So just see this will be as you see here this is just an updated version of that original PDA diagram. Our proposal preserves the hierarchy of the open spaces from the PDA guidelines. The main heart will define the overall character of the open space but incorporate a
collection of elements and characters that were also dotted throughout the other spaces. So as the as the defining open space on site, the heart includes a variety of public elements and experiences. Uh bound by active ground floors of the R1
near the front porch, the forum and retail of C1 and C2, the main heart really balances an active and passive experiences within the main open space. Uh through the shaping of the C1 and C2 groundfall buildings, the main heart opens up into the pocket plaza and
central connector integrates seamlessly into the wider site and wraps all three of these buildings. Um interactive playful elements such as stepping water feature located at uh gateways and entrances draw people into the site. This is a view from Brookline
uh showing a hammer grove in the midground, the active reel of retail of C1 and R1 in the background. the idea to draw people into the the heart of the site. Stepping into the lawn area in the main heart, um we take a pause at the seating
bench that frames the lawn. Here you can enjoy an opportunity to to people watch, meet up with friends. The design of the heart intends to balance that active experience towards the north close to the retail um and the the the buildings and then the more passive experiences towards the south and western edges
integrating into the adjacent spaces and gateways of Longwood Place. Um this is also a space for community to gather whether it's a seasonal farmers market um young families gathering at the play space or students grabbing lunch and lunch and heading over to the Hammer Grove. This is intended to be a
neighborhood commons for all in the community. Then we move to the central connector. This is a linear space at the center of the site. This pedestrian walkway connects all three of the buildings of phase one with the future phases of the project including the passive green uh
improving visibility and permeability of the connector beyond the PDA. We also introduced a new pedestrian connection through the C1 called the Vlo. This provides a direct route bound by retail on either side to connect Brookline to the central connector in the lobby of of
C2. We also widened either side of the connector so that we to create these gateways into the space and also allow that space to to permeate into the other open spaces on site. So this is a view uh looking uh from the
midblock road with C1 on the left and C2 to the right, R1 behind at the very end. uh retail incorporated on either side uh creates retail spillout zones with cafe seating. Some naturalistic elements that are found from the main heart are also dotted throughout this space. The idea
is to create an immediately recognizable character for Longwood Place. Stepping closer to the pocket plaza with the forum to your left, you see a glimpse of the main heart beyond. This is a node of activity that connects all three buildings and the elevated
building facads and flared corners of C2, C1 and C2 create those vistas into the heart. So, we're going to dive a little bit deeper into the landscape details, really focusing on materiality on grading and how we kind of unify the
site as a whole. Um, but first I'd like to visit the existing grading of the site. So you'll see here an overlay of the the building outlines with the existing grains. There's a some conditions on the site today that are quite challenging in particular towards
Brookline A. Uh so you create this kind of transition this stepped barrier along along Brook line. But thankfully um grading was the very first topic that when the team got together we we tackled. Um we worked together to really prioritize accessible entrances and key
circulation routes through the site and between buildings. We graded the site to allow adjacent buildings from to flow from one to another. And we consolidated grades near the R1 front porch in the C1 lobby at the midblock street to create civic experience to help define these
spaces while integrating seating and planting. Uh next we're going to talk through a series of sections. Um and I'll go through these quickly and we can jump back to these later if you have any questions. But this is a conceptual section cutting through R1 and the main heart looking towards the north. You can
see people can perch on the seating areas under the front porch overlooking the main heart. And then the main heart itself uh is a is grade is transitioned uh with grade transitions below 2%. As we move along the site towards the
connector, the grades allow C1 and C2 to share the same finish floor elevation along the central connector and a gentle slope from Pilgrim Road connects through the pocket plaza to the connector. At the Velo, we've introduced an
accessible connection from Brookline A all the way to that C2 lobby. And then changing direction looking south now at the midblock road you'll see the gray change uh transitioning along the midblock road itself. Um and
then at the C1 entrance we've addressed in a similar approach to the front porch stepping the building back and using civic steps to create an upper active retail edge. This change is is around 3T indifference and there's an accessible walkway directly adjacent to those civic
steps. So now we're going to dive a little bit deeper into understanding the look and feel of the of the landscape. The over overarching ideas, textures, and materiality that really help to unify the site and create a consistent language. Uh the first of these is a
playful interactive elements such as water features, seating, fire pits, and play elements with a consistent language. These are consolidated around the main heart, but then are also dotted at key gateways, nodes or circulation routes. These elements also sit on a carefully cured paving system that responds to the
different zones of Longwood Place. The details of these will be thoughtfully integrate kind of human scale details, playfully creating textures and warm tones of materials to create a flow of material from one space to another as well as unifying the interior with the exterior. So that same material
materiality will flow into the public uh areas of the ground floor. And then finally, the planting strategy reinforces this feeling of framed open spaces. This is inspired by the emerald necklace and it really brings an approachable rich layering of plantings from ground covers, shrubs to canopies.
And we're really carefully considering seasonal interest and native species to make sure that this planting helps to frame and soften the public realm. And with that, I'll pass back to Emily. Okay, we've prepared an animation uh like I mentioned to
illustrate the ground floor of the buildings to show uh begin to show the scale of the buildings, the relationship of the buildings and the landscape architecture. It's very diagrammatic. Before I dump uh jump into that and play the animation, I just want to point out the sequence so everyone can understand
where where we're walking. We'll start here at the corner of the site, walk north along Brookline Avenue, uh turn onto Midblock Street, head down the central connector, kind of walk around the front porch and and R1, and then back into the heart. So, I will stop
sharing this, share the animation. So, as we start, we're walking north along Brookline A. You're looking at the corner of the C1 building here heading down Brookline A. The
the the sidewalks are about 26 ft designed with Boston complete streets. We are panning removing the landscape architecture so you can understand the buildings and how they and how they touch the ground. We've also brought a
version of this animation without the plantings if you'd like to if you'd like to see that. Um, coming to the end of uh or the corner rather of Brookline Avenue and Midblock Street. Understanding the subtle grade change as Philip pointed
out at the entry to C1. At this point, your eye is drawn to the opening of the connector where the buildings flare and create a bit of a gateway between C1 and C2. And as we head down the connector, you'll notice that
architectural datim line at the at the podiums of the buildings at level three. You'll notice an implied ceiling and another um uh recognizing that architectural datim line. Here we've shown this sort of catinary lighting.
You can see the vehicle to the left, which is not just a way to create an opening in the building, but is a way for pedestrians to draw pedestrians from Brookline Avenue to the connector. You can see the front porch here in this structural column of R1 that creates a
bit of a terminus along the axis of the connector. That's really the an organizing spine for the entire master plan. You're seeing the heart to the left, the lawn, the play space. the front porch to your right again. And now we're walking around um through the
short along the short street connector, the bike and ped connector back to Pilgrim Road. You'll see a consistent uh streetscape with the uh the pedestrian zone, the consistent street trees, the entry to the residential building on your right
hand side, and looking back through the pocket plaza towards C1 on your right, kind of looking right at the forum. Walking directly to the forum where that space might open out with operable storefront,
the hammock grove and the other lawn spaces and circulation spaces of the heart. And kind of coming back around to our starting point and understanding how these three buildings of phase one frame the heart. Thank you. I I I realize you may want to
see that again, but for now, I'll stop sharing. Uh put a slide back up or let me know what you'd like to see. Do you have a shade study? I think that's pretty significant to the open space understanding.
We do. We have a shadow study. Yes. Yeah, that would be helpful if you could share that. Maybe that was in your your original submission. It was. Let me I think I have that open. If I don't, I will open it and share
that. Bear with me. I have it open in another program. Um, sorry if there's so many things open. Here we go. Here we go. Okay. Uh, what I'm sharing with you is the
is the shadow study from our from our um from our PNF submission. Let me get to the start of these. Um the the format of these is they're they're a little bit well they're
they're they're more or less the um the the format that we always use. But what you're seeing, just to explain really quickly, is the proposed shadow in blue. Um, and then what would be existing shadow in gray, but they don't
necessarily focus on the heart, the site itself. Yeah. Yeah. So, these may or may not be useful in terms of what you're looking for right now. Let's see. Know I let me I was really wondering about the site itself, the the
heart and the um the corridor. Yeah, I don't know that we have that. I mean these these include the site but um they don't they don't uh they don't zoom in. Yeah, they don't zoom in and they don't and they don't show they show
existing shadow on the site. So they're not they may not be relevant for right now, but it's something we could we can create. Philip, can you just speak to the um actual um shade conditions because I I know you know it well. It's not yeah
it's we we have done studies on the the sun and shade of the the site and um I think the overall approach is you know to ensure and you can kind of see that how the site plan is laid out is ensuring that we're creating a landscape
that um uh can work within this urban context. So in spaces like the central connector really opening and carving out the buildings to kind of widen those spaces, allow more sunlight in in early mornings and in later in the evening on the on the south side. Um so we've
thought very intentionally about where we have um placed plantings and trees um and that location. But if this is something you want to see in more detail, we can defin we haven't shown it in a graphic sense of a series of plans, but it's something we've considered as we've gone through the design process.
And the other thing I'd love thank you that that's helpful. The other thing I would would love to understand, Philip, is I don't really um and I know I very much appreciate the the walkthrough in the animation and the presentation tonight. I still don't think I have a
very good sense of the scale of the heart. Could you maybe even just scale one of those lawn areas for me just to get a sense or if you have a comparison of anything just just so I can get a better sense of how big how big everything is. Um I I mean I
think uh in terms of uh it's it's roughly I think from from the Hammer Grove to the kind of the feature bench we're talking about you know 60 to 80 ft within that central core of that that open space. Um uh previous um studies we
would have I'd have to go back and double check uh the kind of scale studies again. We did that previously on a on a previous plan. I'm trying to think about in terms of Boston what a what a a local um example would be. Um
I think yeah I I think that and other people may may not know this. I think the the um that central round space at northeastern
in front of the architecture school and and the subway and the the T-top I think is about 100 by 200 more or less. So that's probably somewhat similar to this space. What's the um the footprint of R1, the
residential building? The footprint of R1 is just about um 10,000 square feet on the ground floor plan. This I've the the heart is around 180 by 180. If you look at this sort of this square that
I'm mapping out and kind of it goes all the way to you know the let me see I can't use the zoom kind of this is the edge of the building. So we're also including a pedestrian connection all the way to there.
So it's about 3/4 of an acre or so, right? This kind of central core is is that kind of like 80 to 100 and then those additional circulation points uh bike two two
lane bike way and then the retail on the edge kind of adds the the um all those together around 180. It's kind of the same same size as the Seapport Commons. Um.
Mhm. Just um Philip, we have a um comparison study of the main heart to um other kind of public spaces. Yeah, I can pull I'm just I can Yeah, I can pull that up if we want to look through that. Would that
be helpful, Shauna? Yeah, absolutely. Thank you. So, we went through a series of of concept comparisons. This is kind of early kind of massing studies and has evolved slightly since then. Um, but the
the current site is kind of very similar. We kind of looked at the seapport commons and you can kind of see the open space and then this is an overlay of this is the R1 building here to the north C1 and C2 kind of these the framed lawns and then the active edge
kind of overlaid onto that site. Um another example is kind of the the landmark green and Fenway and how that sits within the site as well. So it's a similar kind of scale um that's true as as the within the se port.
Thanks Phillip. Yeah. So I I think the reason that I was asking that is that um that I'd imagined it as as I'm do you mind pulling the plan up again? um the the site the overall site plan. I
think I I I think that I um had imagined it as a as a a much larger space. Um so and it may be because well
um I think there's some very very beautiful moves in it. Um and and there are a lot of excitement. there's there's quite a lot of diversity in the in the architecture on the both you know both vertically but at the at the ground
level in terms of scale and language um and I and quite a lot of diversity in the um in the landscape as well in in terms of of character um for a fairly
not a huge um area for for the heart And so I'm really trying to to put the pieces together um to really understand what that that experience is. I think the the walkthrough is very very beautiful, but I think part of it is because we're getting a very very edited
experience of of the architecture and that it is extremely it's all white and so we just had a sort of a beautiful, you know, quiet white um and green lovely wa walk through. But when when I start to um to really look at the
landscape and all the different um characters also in coordination with the architecture, um it it feels um disjunctive to me. I I think that there's small moments, but I don't really know what the what's tying the
whole thing together. And so that's why I was really trying to understand is the scale um you know is is the scale so big that it's not really one heart it's a series of different hearts. Um but but I think
the lawn areas actually aren't really that large. Um so and then some of the water the fountain being sort of stepped to the edge. I don't really understand the placing of things. Uh so so that's really um what I'm I'm trying to
understand about the project is is the what and the the why and where of everything as well as I think I had said at the at the first time to try to understand this and I actually do think that some of the diagrams were very
helpful um without the the colors in the paving just to really understand what the the spatial experience is is of it. Well, it's not my um habit to speak about the details of landscape, but I guess one of my questions about what
piggybacking on what Shauna is is saying is about the decision to make the main heart actually like a heart in the sense that there are lots of things leading to it, right? lots of u like uh aortas and so forth leading to the heart as opposed
to the decision to make the main heart more passive and something you move around and therefore larger. Um and um I I you know I don't I I don't have a I'm not saying that's the right thing to do. I'm just curious about that decision
because it does um cut it up into a a lot of pieces that may all be very nice but that um to the point of the scale uh comparison uh no one of them feels big enough or strong enough to sort of carry
the day. I I is a is a just a question I have. Yeah. I mean I I think the the approach to the kind of the design of this was really to think about kind of going back to those principles about connections to the existing context and and there are a lot of you know there's
the uh Windsor there's a lot of different um schools nearby and and campuses and there's going to be a lot of movement through and around this site and I think what we really were trying to take advantage of is you know desire lines are desire lines and I think you
have to kind of design to them otherwise is they're going to kind of so let's say say for example the main heart was a a a singular lawn in the center kind of the reality is people will move across and cut through it and we wanted to think very intentionally about those desire lines and those connections and actually
tie them into the overall design approach as well as well as kind of creating that kind of consolidated frame around that open space. So, it was both kind of dissected, but once you were in it, the landscape, the planting, that that bench would make it feel unified
when you're within the center of the site. Well, I I guess I wonder if um and I hear you. Um um but I wonder if if some of that could be manipulated a bit so that you're guiding um you know guiding uh people through because right
now it does feel like the circulation diagram trumps the landscape diagram right like I I when I look at this what I see are the paths um rather than uh my eye doesn't rest on
a um a a a focal point of landscape, let's say. Um, and uh I'm I'm I defer to Laura and Shauna to to translate what it is I'm trying to say if they if they if they feel the same way. But I think
that's the the thing that I'm, you know, struggling with. like if the if the path that leads from the corner of long of uh the left hand lower corner um were sort of banked around towards uh C1 so that
the framed lawn grew uh in prominence or you know you obviously understand the site much better than I do and how people move through it but um you know is there an opportunity for something like that where that sort of crossing um you know, shifts to the shifts to the
right. Maybe the hammock grove goes away or is removed uh reduced in favor of flipping that over to the other space to make that more robust. I I don't I I don't know. I'm just uh I'm
just kind of reacting to the um to the the patterning that I'm seeing. Thanks, David. And Shauna, um, before I talk about the site itself, could we go back to the slide that you showed that
shows the connection the connections to um the riverway and because I think that was an that was um important in terms of connecting to existing in spaces and your your
acknowledgement that maybe this campus needs its own or this space needs its own um place the surrounding space to feel more privatized. Mhm. So So how
does this work? So if if I'm if I'm at Beth Israel Deaconist at the bottom middle of the bottom of the page, right? Yeah. So, I cross over and then you've made a corridor basically that
kind of frames your way down to the necklace, but that is going through a parking area. Is that Yeah, this the there's the entrance to the Windsor school which is which is a which is here in the drop off. Okay. Um so along this
edge there is initially a a pedestrian walkway. Yeah. Um that is then a row of trees. So pedestrian walkway of about 10 ft. then a a a six foot planting strip with trees, bike parking, and then a two-lane bike lane uh that goes and
connects through from Brookline to to Pilgrim. Y and then you end up with the open space uh kind of page right north of the site. Yep. That was that was defined very clearly in the in the original PDA that there was the
pedestrian connection against the Windsor school. I'm actually just trying to understand this because the um because of your time limitation, you had to jump past some things. And so on the other side from Emanuel
um going between the site we're talking about and the future buildings, does that connect through how does that connect through uh BEu? So there there's a there's a new pedestrian crossing along Brook line and then there's the pedestrian sidewalk that you will eventually kind of connect through and
these two pedestrian connections here through the the phase two of the project. You can also connect through between the C2 C3 and the R1 building through here. And there's also a winter garden that'll be a public uh interior
space that extends the connector through that C3 building and into the passive green. Okay, that's really helpful. Thank you. And then um where you uh the is it the Valo? The Viko. Yeah. This
this the C1 building right where that connects into Brooklyn Avenue that's just connecting you to the city street and then um as you go through the plaza on the other side on the uh right side of the residential building and what
does that connect into? just the the uh city sidewalk as well. Yeah, correct. Cuz the the R1 lobby is is right on that that corner there. So, kind of connecting that right there. I see. Okay, let's go back to a a planting plan. That was helpful. I wanted to It's
a very complicated part of the city. Yes. And yet when I look at you when I look at the plan, I was also something else I was looking at um with this is that you actually have a lot of space for where
you are in the city. And um I don't think nearly I I can't remember. You said a number in the beginning. I can't remember how many acres you said or maybe you said square feet. The heart the heart itself is is around
like 34,000 square feet. Okay. The the thing that that concerns me is that you could you could look at the landscape to me in one of one of two ways. You could look at it being
organizing and the buildings are in it or the buildings being organized and the landscape is within that. And I'm not sure which I'm looking at, but the thing that I'm concerned about is that the landscape is so dissected that there's
not any place to really land. And at the main heart, while I appreciate the idea of that, it feels like that's where all the pulsing is in and no pun intended. All the pulsing is
in It's very hard to not keep going down those kind of Yeah. Sorry. I I do it myself when I'm explaining it. and like so and I and I wonder if you know the one of the things that's so hard about urban spaces I think urban landscape
spaces is getting people to move through a space and use all those spaces and you have given a lot of different like if I look at the size of the pocket plaza that's pretty
big and I I am curious as to why you didn't think about spreading out some of the goodness like the hammock grove into and I'm just making a you know a a program comment like why you didn't make
the pocket plaza the hammock grove someplace that people could really go and rest and just hang out kind of away from the main circulation of that plaza.
Mhm. You know, or is it a swing garden or something that really pulls three people through? And likewise with the play area, right, which feels like it's really it's sort of the opposite thing happens for me. it's sort of tucked
away. You know, would the pocket plaza be a great space for that? Because play areas um are crazy town. You know, they're they're a place not just for kids, but also a place for the adults that bring
them. They're they're as much social for them for adults as they are for the kids that have that um accompany adults. And so I I feel like there's a lot of interesting program that would draw
people here, but it feels very concentrated in the main heart. And I don't know if it has to be that. If you think about a, you know, the analogy of a heart and kind of spreading out to the
limbs and spreading to the, you know, spreading to the um the main body and to your head so that the main heart could be this place of orientation that then as you move through it, you
discover that there are other activities to come back to. And um by also by connecting them all together there none of them has their proper space right like
cities city urban spaces suffer from not having enough space right like like urban ecology you know do crappy because they don't have enough space to do all of the biological processes. Well, humans are
kind of like that, too, I think. And I think you could get a lot more out of that main heart by starting to distribute um distribute some of that program in
other areas. And even though we're just talking about the landscape, I I can't help but feel that the buildings have a role here in helping to shape the landscape spaces as well. And so for me,
it's a little bit hard to disconnect them. Yeah, if I could go ahead, David, if I could jump into that a little bit because I appreciate u you know, obviously at the last session, we're not talking about the architecture today per se. Um although we are really talking
about the bases of the buildings. I mean I I I really like this drawing but I keep reminding myself that the you know that the front porch is undercover and that the building extends you know quite a bit forward into the heart um uh from what we're seeing and therefore the
legibility of that space you know is partly under a building and and partly uh in the open air. And it it makes me feel a bit like the front porch zone really is more connected to the central
connector just conceptually um than to the landscape which in my mind is mostly out from under the building if if that makes sense. Um which gets a bit to the uh architecture. I really by the way uh you know thank you for the walk
through and I very much appreciate that and there is something you know uh very I think exciting about the uh language that's emerging around yes thank you that's a good view uh around this kind of lifted landscape that allows some
room to breathe um through the connector which I must say I'm very concerned about um not dimensionally um or um uh you know I think some of the precedents that you like for example Rockefeller Center was one of your presidents but the buildings Viking Rockefeller Center
are a lot lower and so it's the it's the it's the sheer mass of those two buildings and um you know not just the light but the wind and the the the the feeling that's going to be uh through there that you know frankly is still a
concern to me. this idea of the bracing and so forth that lifts that up. I I really feel pretty strongly that there needs to be a um a common strategy or commonality amongst these three buildings that I see under the porch and
I see in I'm sorry the building on the left is C1. C1. Yeah. Yeah. C1. But C2, if you could pull a little bit further back, um you know C2 is is sort of true. Yeah. Thank you. C2 is a very kind of lands very conventionally and of course
the the um the base is expressed at roughly that same height. But if it was as if if it borrowed more heavily from the language of C1 and was more permeable and you could move in and through it and around it and it felt like that space
kind of shifted out and and uh on both sides, I think this space would be more convincing to me. And I think that that is maybe a clue about the architecture which we're going to be talking about at another time. But you know, Laura made
an interesting point which is, you know, are these buildings sitting in a landscape or are they buildings shaping a landscape? And I think that the the the the strut language of the two buildings that we're seeing right now on
the left and at the end, you know, suggests buildings in a landscape. Um where the landscape is moving and flowing through and around. And I'm like, I'm willing to go there, but then I want to see that happen on C2 as well
and have that landscape shift and uh move around to um the green spaces that are beyond it. And you know, is there a vic uh you know, through that building um that gets you to the other side? Um and that this whole development
basically is in a sense lifted on some kind of a a a platform that allows landscape as the main element um to be what defines this space or it's something else um in which case the you
know the architecture I I feels very um um I don't want to say haphazard but but opportunistic uh in each of its locations and it makes the legibility of the landscape more difficult to me. So I
I think that that's that's where I'm you know and and maybe that's a clearer response to the architecture than I had when it was initially presented by by focusing on what the public realm ultimately is. Um, and I think it could
be that maybe the this space that we're looking at through here is actually more urban because of the nature of the of the uh the scale of the buildings and so forth, which is beginning to be implied. But then, boy oh boy, when you get to that heart, it
should be like a park. Mhm. Um, a real park. Um, that that that really uh um feels See, that's where Laura, I'm not, you know, where I I get a little concerned about like pulling the pieces apart too much. Um, and maybe you're
talking about programming, not necessarily green space. I am talking about programming. Yeah, you're talking about programming. I'm talking about what draws you through and makes you want to occupy different parts of the site. Yeah. Like this this view, which I find compelling. I want I wish if I
turned around and looked the other way it felt the same. You know what I mean? That it felt permeable. Yeah. May May I respond just to a couple of points there? Um to David to to your point um about kind of the C1 Well, obviously
talking about the architecture and in another meeting, there were some comments we got from the group that are going to be kind of, you know, tied into what we present back then. So it may have evolved from this point when we present. You know, I think one thing
that is is very important to to to know as this is a site is there's a parking underneath the the kind of twothirds of the of the landscape under the central connector. Um, and what that means is that there's an uh a down ramp into that parking bay which is in the the C2
building which has freed up a lot of the service that was in the C1 building. So we're able to have that like 360 permeable ground floor of the C1 that could then introduce the VCO because the C2 building itself is kind of taking a lot more of that back of house. And so
we we this this introduction of the VCO kind of not perfectly centered on the C1 building. It was kind of shifted slightly more to the pocket plaza was to Lauri your comment about like those circulation patterns and trying to connect those those spaces. Um, I think just to respond to to Laura your kind of
comment. I think we are really thinking about I'm kind of iterating as we move through, we really think about how we we want the main heart to do exactly that is be the main heart. And I think it's getting that I I agree. I think getting that right balance of what is there
versus what's dotted elsewhere. And I think you know we we actually had explored the Hammock Grove being in the Pocket Plaza before and it's also been in the Riverway Gateway. And I think through these conversations, we'll find out where that where they need to land and where it makes the most sense. But I
think I I agree with you is that, you know, I think we want to make sure that these spaces are both have a variety of open space as well as when you get into that heart, it feels unified. And I think you know that active Emily mentioned the active retail that also
helps to draw people in. We want to have these active edges and it is a balance between landscape and architecture and entryways and we want this to to unify the site while allow each of the buildings to have their own character for their because for their own reasons
because some are commercial, some are residential and I think we're just trying to balance where that lays. So, you know, Laura, your points exact are incredibly helpful to kind of think about it in that way with fresh eyes. Well, and I I think one of the one of the great things about landscapes in
cities is they can be surprising. Yeah. Right. Whereas architecture, no matter how beautiful it is, it it has this presence in the greater urban fabric, right? That holds the city together. But the truth is most of most
of us experience the city on foot at a human scale. Yeah. And so for me th this always feels like an particularly with honestly I think you have a lot of land here but um come I don't get these but
um I think that there's a level of mystery that's missing from this as well. In other words down the central connector you look down everything's exposed to you right? you're not you you kind of
know what you're headed towards. And I feel that way from from like every place that you enter this the site, it's not and I'm not saying you need to block views everywhere. I'm saying as you kind
of go through these various rooms that like your attention is drawn, but you're always looking ahead and you're not quite sure what that is. So there's these moments of complete clarity and other moments of just kind
of mystery but not being uncomfortable about it. Yeah. Emily, could you could you Emily, could you just jump to the landscape renderings? We have some additional renderings in the appendix as well. Okay. Kind of just more landscape focused to kind of talk to that. Um I
think later on they're they're full screen. Um but to that point uh kind of the play space bound by landscape. Then this is uh the next one kind of under the the R1 porch. So you were seating with the porch behind you. That idea of the framing to the right but then that
openness towards the C1 to the left. Um and then the next one is like within the heart itself. So again trying to to your point about the dissection of the open space. We're wanting to find that balance between circulation and this still feeling like a unified site um uh
as well. So that kind of wrapping of the landscape and the frame of the planting to help to do that. Um we're very fortunate that um you know we've got all a lot of the heart is actually on grade so we'll be able to plant some quite um a number of trees uh which I think will
help to create that sense of discovery as well. And then the final one is is between the C2 building and the R1. That sense of discovery that talk about Laura is like creating these carveouts within the planting to create those kind of pocket moments and those kind of
slightly more residential um spaces uh that feel that human scale. So Philip on Oh, sorry. Just one thing. When I look at these perspectives, which are all beautiful and they have some really special things about them, I worry about
them being a little too same sides. Okay. And the hammock is the hammock grove is a just such a terrific idea, but it shouldn't have six hammocks. And and and I don't know, Philip, how many are in there, but I'm saying it should
be enough that when you get, you know, x number of people and some of them are double wide for, you know, families and couples and like it should feel feel both calming, but like this collective
sway could be so great. Um, so the idea I think is fantastic. It's where and how much room you are giving this. I just want to be careful that you're not dissecting things too
much and in doing so making them too small. Go ahead. Oh, I'm sorry. Can I ask a question? If you could go to the site plan for a second. um the um and and I'm I'm I'm putting this out there just for thought, but getting back to
that notion of of loosening up the ground plane of of let's say C2 for example, um I wonder if the the the end of C2 uh that is closest to R1 where there's that looks like some retail and
I don't know what that gray space is. I'm sure it's something important. Um but if if that was as porchlike and open uh along that whole uh end of the building and it sort of wrapped into the
central connector a bit so that that whole central connector space was conceptually shorter um in terms of uh you're moving from the midblock street and you move down through and then when you get to the vico on the left it
starts to open up on the right as well. you know, it sort of expands in both directions. Then that pocket plaza, um, in the same way that the front front porch gives space to the main heart, that whatever's under C2 could give
space to that pocket plaza. And that pocket plaza in my mind becomes more neighborhood focused as a park that that has um the play area and has certain functions that are more neighborhood oriented towards Pilgrim Road and it
feels it is at a scale of the residents because I am I'm personally very concerned about the relationship to the streets behind. So, you know, and I'd like to see some views from that, uh, you know, when we get a little further into the a project. And that might mean
that the main heart could be a little bit uh maybe a little bit grander, a little bit greener, a little bit more um uh less cut up by by things. and and you you you literally have a a the heart
which is the main park, if you will, um and a a neighborhood park that that is uh tucked off of Pilgrim Road. And then that view from the main heart into the central connector in addition to shortening it from the midblock side coming into the main heart would have a
kind of a uniform character of being all lifted up. Um, and the three buildings would have some commonal common expression as they uh meet both the the pocket park or the neighborhood park I'm
calling it and the call it more civic park. Um, and so that's just a a question um because I think that could potentially solve a few issues. Yeah. And I I actually want to expand upon that a little bit. Um because I the
buildings are very very strong and very bold and I really do feel that the landscape needs a more there's very strong moves in the landscape but I think it needs a more overall boldness to to the moves because I think that the
pieces are quite small. I think um the word dissected has came up. I think if you were to think of that whole end of the site as the main heart, the pocket park, the area around the front porch
and start thinking of it overall as primarily green and then working the circulation around it. I I know of course people have to move in a direction that's that's easy and logical, but I'm I know you have the talents to be able to do that and
combine it um with with the the sort of spatial um ex spatial quietness but also spatial strength of having a really strong robust kind of green end as a counterpoint to these very, you know,
very tall and strong buildings. So, so I would encourage you to even take the things that you typically that you love and sort of remove them for a moment. You can bring them back, but just remove them and see what happens if you were to just kind of really take a very strong
green approach to the to the to the plaza to the heart um where then the the experiences become jewels with within it. Um and then then I I do want to talk about the central connector because I think that it feels a little empty both
in terms of its spatial activities but also in terms of what brackets it because for one whole side of it or almost one so whole side of it the C2 building is is office and lab which which I'm understanding is is private
space. So there's a lot along that central connector that isn't really activating it. Um and then and then I actually am am pretty worried about the public realm along Pilgrim Road where it's all back of house for that whole C2 building.
Um but but just in terms so I think working between architecture and landscape I think if there's more activity in the C2 building at at the at the ground level and both both sides um I think from the landscape sort of
focusing more on things that would help to activate that central connector. what what else other than you know when the the water jets are shut off what is that space because most of the year the water jets are going to be shut off. So so really getting a sense of of a you know
a of the of scale and excitement and interest. It's a completely different character than this big green grove at the at the leftand end. But what is what is the urban character and how can you pump that up with the landscape and and then and then again you know pilgrim
road I think it has to start with the architecture to get to get more energy. Um, I also would think with with the forum, how does that activity of the forum spill out directly? And and I see you've opened up a plaza, but there may be, you know, there may be a more direct
way of doing it, you know, but but anyway, kind of big picture, those are kind of the big the big moves I would suggest. Mhm. I like the idea of it sounds not not your words, but my interpretation is
taking some of these smaller what what graphically look like smaller pieces and maybe connecting them and the idea of wrapping around from Pilgrim Road into the central connector. I do think we should point out that the the function of these buildings necessitates some gas
storage and other uh support type of spaces that wouldn't necessarily be appropriate to to be adjacent directly adjacent as as spillout space or outdoor space. But I do think that some of that is certainly still
possible. Um, and and that we might think of how to make these smaller swaths, smaller pieces into larger swaths that connect. Yeah. Yeah, and I think you know could just exactly right Shauna about kind of
where those retail are located and the spill out and trying to bring activity in in both the architecture and the the programming and the retail of those. We tried to dot that through the site as so one side of the connector was where the lobby was, the other side was retail
and then back again. So we were always at least kind of as as you're moving through space there's always kind of a node and node and node but that that's a good point to kind of explore that a little bit further on that relationship. gonna say one other thing, Phillip, which is I'm so glad you showed that
grading diagram and you know, it was a tough nut to solve and I'm wondering how you can actually use the grading differences that you have more effectively in here. Um,
so I'm, you know, I'm always, um, I just believe in the power of topography for space making. they were they were a great team and concentrating on that first to kind of try and get it right because I think yeah yeah to to to take advantage of it in a design approach as
opposed to a series of walls is something we're trying to achieve. So yeah, and one other thing with um just to think about when you when as you're sort of going forward when we see see it the next time we see the landscape is really thinking could you I'm sorry go back to
the other plan that we were just looking at just because I won't remember the name of the road um the oh midblock street think of what what is the landscape character of that of that edge because
right right now it feels And I know it's a service access too, but it's a pretty wide space. So, I'm giving that kind of an overall landscape character of it of its own because it is also a gateway into you know into this space.
I do think that there are um you know a lot of clues in this drawing that you know lead into the next discussion and um and I I can't help but think that um the view of R1 across from
Brooklyn Avenue across the main heart um as I recall in the guidelines that's like this the signature that was intended to be like the the signature marker building. Um, and you know, I'd you'd love to see a view of that um, uh,
as it's framed by both the school and C1, you know, when you come back. But, um, you know, just architecturally, uh, the the language of C1 uh, even at the ground plane is is really the
dominant language. It's the it's the it's the signature. it feels like the signature building and um and maybe that's fine but I think then that I I'd like to understand the strategy of
uh the hierarchy of um architectural expression as it relates to the ground plane as it relates to the the the ground plan and I think that at the ground level looking down the connector and seeing the sort of tree support of D1 that's clearly very intentional and I
understand that and like that makes sense to me. Um, but I'm just trying to as as you pull back um I just want the legibility of of um the architecture and the spaces to be in
harmony. Mhm. Thank you for a good discussion. Yeah. No, thank you. Yeah. Great, very nice presentation and um really exciting possibilities. Possibilities. Yeah, a lot of possibilities. Um commissioners, can I quickly ask just
for public testimony? I don't think that there is any. I'm just getting looking over participants here. At this time, we'd like to invite any members in uh of the public in attendance who may wish to contribute public testimony to raise your digital hand and staff will call on you. If you're calling in by phone, dial
star9 to activate the raise hand function and star six to mute and unmute yourself. Please state your name and any relevant project affiliation information. And please keep your comments to two minutes. Allison, just give me one second. Let me um promote you to co-host here so you
can unmute. Allison, are you able to unmute? Oh yes, thank you. Uh Allison Ptonis. Um possibly not so relevant right now, but um I did want to make a comment about all the the seating benches that um a
lot of them look like concrete and um no backs and no arms. So that's that's a concern I know for um older people. Um, and it doesn't promote um, you know,
kind of comfortable seating for a long period of time, especially if you're watching uh, kids in the play space or trying to um, just relax more. It's it uh, you need you need backs. Um and and
one more thought about um where trees can be planted if they are um I I heard the comment about the size of the garage and I'm assuming that trees couldn't be planted more in the central connector
because of the garage space. I wasn't sure if I understood that correctly, but thank you. Thanks, Allison. Anyone else public comments? All right. Um, Russ, I see you have your
hand raised. Yeah, I'm sorry. We were I was struggling with the tech here. Um, I just wanted to to do a a quick closer and it's by way of making sure we're absorbing all the comments correctly. Um, one of the the two things that we
didn't talk a lot about today with the commissioners and and this is the areas where I want to dig into where if I have given guidance to the design teams that bumps into things that you you guys have um asked us to respond to because
obviously that that's usually the rub. So one is the retail and the density of retail. you you got we didn't throw this statistic up, but we are about 19,500 square ft of retail. I think the plans
showed that it's predominantly around C C1 and then really key moments at the R1 building and then at the at the corner of C2 and the locations of those are
very much um considering the analysis that we have done on how we can make successful retail. Um the and I I want to make sure we didn't nobody misinterpreted that the purple that's on the C2 building isn't active lab space.
It's the lobbies of the of the lab space on the C2 building. Um but we we have really pushed hard on testing ourselves about the viability
uh of making sure the retail is successful and not lying to ourselves. that simply if we put retail there, it will be successful. I will probably continue to put that pressure on Philip and the design teams as we go through. I
It's just that I I guess what I would ask you guys as commissioners is if if you see it again and you think that I've put bad pressure, please speak up because that that that's the areas where I don't want my team to listen to me when they should be listening to you.
And I don't think you said that today, but I also don't think we we talked a lot about retail. And then the last thing and Philip in our in our discussions with him, we talked about it, but it didn't come up today is that in the PDA process when we went through really from the public and from you you
folks um when we talked about the diversity of Maine of the open spaces, that's when we really made that big move to have the heart versus the passive green. And we we ourselves said the heart is active. That's the active
active space. The passive green is the quiet one. And and and there was a call from both you and and a lot of members of the public to make sure that we were being um uh overt about that. So I feel you know I always feel bad
when when I walk away from meetings where I feel like I've given bad guidance to my design team. Uh but you guys should know that is how we talked about we didn't talk about the passive green much at all today and obviously because it's in a future it's in a future phase but I I did want this group
to know that I was putting pressure and hopefully not the wrong pressure. This is where Philip is going to have to talk to us about saying, "Yeah, we have a passive green, but there's still there's still the passive pathway." And there's still we still want some passive things
in here. And I think I'm going to go back with the interpretation that you're saying, "Yeah, maybe not. Maybe you don't need it passive up there in between R1 and C2. Maybe you want it more active." not more different types of spaces, but really I what I'm hearing
from you guys is maybe a little bit more activity up there. And I I I I'm that's the guidance I'm going to give. If you think I'm interpreting you wrong, please tell me now because I feel like a lot of what Philip has done has been guidance from from us, from me, and I I don't
want to be wrong again, I guess. Well, can I ask a can I ask you a question about that? So, um, and thank you very much. I I very much appreciate your concerns and thoughts about that. Um, and I don't remember if we've ever
talked about this, so if we have, I apologize, but the forum, what is it exactly? Why is it there? And how active is it going to be on a day-to-day basis?
because um if that's uh uh a community space um um that is you know occasionally active um and I want us to be real about it um y is that the best
location for it as opposed to for example there's a retail space um on uh um uh uh Brooklyn Avenue uh Yeah, thank you. uh to the low uh to the lower I mean maybe it's not big enough
but the to the in the C1 on the right hand side where there's that yeah over there where I don't know that retail there is going to be you know that there's going to be that much foot traffic that it's going to be so active whereas when I think about concentrating
retail and really an uh around the the prow of C1 and the end of C2 and down the connector of I I I just wonder like you know wh why there and maybe there's a fantastic reason. Um but it does raise the
question of the retail uh community space site planning strategy or you know even whether the forum should be in a future phase. I don't know. I'm just asking. I I I it's it's a spot-on question, Philip, or uh uh David, because one of the things we practiced
about making sure you guys saw in case you had concerns about it is in the PDA, I think you would notice from this slide that the forum was 100% facing the heart. And through the course of working on design with our consultants with the
team that the our our consultants, our retail consultant basically said, "Guys, the Brookline retail is the really definable successful retail. Please consider pulling the forum around. The
idea behind the location of the forum is to both feed off of the heart but to feed the heart use that your very first question. We don't have it totally nailed down. We have um a strong desire on our end to make it very broadly
useful but to also be performing arts useful. So there is a there is a performing arts component to it that we are trying to focus on uh right now with the guidance we have from the city and this a city councelor who's very concerned or very involved in this. Um
so we do the logic of it being on the heart was that it feeds the use of it and the use of it can also feed the activity of the heart. We will test based on your questions but that's that's why it's there and kind of why we
moved it. We actually do think the retail on Brooklyn is very valuable retail. Um, from the from the, you know, the comments from our consultant, the the harder challenge quite honestly is making sure that we have viable retail
on the connector. That's the from a from a business perspective and also design perspective. That's the one that we've been very, you know, making sure that we're doing it right, not overloading it, not lying to ourselves about how much retail can actually be successful there.
point. Yes. Sorry. Go ahead. Sorry, David. On on your act on your activation of the How active is the forum? The intent is that it's active all day during the day. The doors will be open. People can come in, sit on the big steps, um have their coffee. It's not
supposed to be programmed all the time. And it's more Allah district hall in the seapport where people can come in, have coffee, um meet, have small group meetings or it can be an event at night such as Russ said as like a performance space. The idea is that it is active
almost every day if we can make that happen. All right. Well, that that's super helpful. And I, you know, certainly know how District Hall worked or used to work. But I think that um it does I think as a performing arts space I you know I just couldn't help but think like for example the the lobby at
the end of of C1 that faces Midblock Street looks like a very grand large lobby that has you know excellent drop off and um you know is very visible. And so I was just in my mind testing the the
the proposition of well you know what would it mean if you know the the the lobbies shifted to the connector and the connectors were sort of activated by lobbies and the the um the forum was you know prominently at the other end of the
building and and the the green spaces the pocket plaza and the main heart were essentially all lined with active retail. So that was what that that was the the the the thing that I was playing out in my head. But I do very much appreciate that if the forum but that
was in my mind imagining a forum or a community space that was like let let's say more more active at night that there was a lot of drop off that you know blah blah blah ticket office whatever. So anyway that's just something for you guys. I I I recognize there's a big
strategy about that, but um thank you for explaining explaining that. Yeah, thank thank you. And if I can just add one one comment, and I can't speak for my um you know, for my fellow commissioners, but thinking about the green end of the left hand side
doesn't mean that it can't be active at all. I wasn't necessarily thinking that it wouldn't be um that it would be sort of a passive quiet space, but that there was uh there was more holding it together and really wondering about the scale of the elements. Um you know, for
for example, the you know, the the water features kind of tucked in one little corner, the hammock, I think maybe too exposed in that the scale, and again, I'm not totally understanding the scale of this to feel completely comfortable. So is there a way that you can can
amalgamate the the green and then and then start carving out the spaces in it to create the the urban activity because I I don't have any objection at all with with the with the concept of of this being a very active space. It just feels
the pieces are a little bit small um and and disconnected from each other. And if could I make a comment on the passive versus active? I think in in urban spaces a lot of path
spa path spaces are path p a s a g e passage spaces and giving people an opportunity to fit along those path pathages really is what makes for pivity.
Feel like I'm speaking some people watching while people are moving past and circulating and like you get to sit away. Yeah. And and I think Shauna's comment about is it right that every side of the hammock space is open to the
public. Whereas things like playgrounds are terrific open on most sides because people can sit across from it. They can, you know, pass by it. They can people love to watch kids and you know what kind of monster doesn't like the sound
of you know kids laughing and playing? Um so so I hear what you're saying but be careful because in the urban setting I think passive spaces particularly when they're given a lot of room can feel
like lonely places and places that people don't necessarily want to stop. People want to do things when they go out into the city, you know. Anyway, and Laura, I know you love a hammock. I love
a hammock. I now know that. Thank you. Thank you for for the clarification. Like I said, I'm almost just making sure that I'm not playing a poor role here in in in pushing the design team. So, all of these comments
are very helpful to me. Thank you very much. Yeah, thank you for asking that question. You have a great client. Who would ask that question, right? So, thank you. One who's used to getting it wrong, that's who. Oh, I'm sure that's not true. Well, I
mean, thank you. Um I think lots to lots to think about. I mean, I think that um one of my takeaways is that obviously there are these guidelines and we worked hard on them and thought hard about them and you're looking at them. Um and that's great. Um but that doesn't mean
in my mind that um some aspect of those couldn't be revisited um if there was a compelling um reason. And um and I mean that's my view. Um
but you know there should be a good reason. Um so all righty well we've taken public testimony and we've discussed next steps. I think we um are all clear that the the proponent will be back for
another subcommittee meeting focused on massing building articulation capital A architecture um at a time to be discussed with the proponent and the project manager. So I think without if there are no further questions from the proponent team or the public I think we can adjourn for the
evening. Thank you all for staying on an extra 15 minutes. We appreciate your time and uh we'll see you thank you at another time. Thank you very much everybody discussion. Thanks.