Planning Board - Planning Board Meeting

AI Generated Transcript

AI Disclaimer: Summaries and transcripts above were created by various AI tools. By their nature, these tools will produce mistakes and inaccuraies. Links to the official meeting recordings are provided for verification. If you find an error, please report it to somervillecivicpulse at gmail dot com.

Meeting Title: Planning Board - Planning Board Meeting
City: Cambridge, MA
Date Published: 2025-08-19

Back to all meetings
View Official Recording
View Summary

AI Disclaimer: Summaries and transcripts above were created by various AI tools. By their nature, these tools will produce mistakes and inaccuraies. Links to the official meeting recordings are provided for verification. If you find an error, please report it to somervillecivicpulse at gmail dot com.

Time & Speaker	Transcript
Ted Cohen	Welcome to the August 19, 2025 meeting of the Cambridge Planning Board. My name is Ted Cohen and I will be acting as Chair this evening. Pursuant to Chapter 2 of the Acts of 2023, adopted by Massachusetts General Court and approved by the Governor, the City is authorized to use remote participation at meetings of the Cambridge Planning Board. All board members, applicants, and members of the public will state their name before speaking. All votes will be taken by roll call. Members of the public will be kept on mute until it is time for public comment. I will give instructions for public comment at that time, and you can also find instructions on the city's webpage for remote planning board meetings. This meeting is being video and audio recorded and is being streamed live on the City of Cambridge online meeting portal and on cable television channel 22 within Cambridge. There will also be a transcript of the proceedings. I'll start by asking staff to take board members' attendance and verify that all members are audible.
SPEAKER_14	Thank you, Ted. This is Jeff Roberts from Community Development. I'll start with Mary Leydecker. Are you present and is the meeting visible and audible to you?
Mary Lydecker	Present, visible, and audible.
SPEAKER_14	Thank you, Mary. Diego Macias, are you present? Is the meeting visible and audible to you? Diego is absent. Tom Sieniewicz, are you present? Is the meeting visible and audible to you? Tom is absent. Ashley Tan, are you present? Is the meeting visible and audible to you?
Ashley Tan	Present, visible, and audible.
SPEAKER_14	Thank you, Ashley. Carolyn Zern, are you present? Is the meeting visible and audible to you?
Carolyn Zern	Present, visible, and audible.
SPEAKER_14	Thank you, Carolyn. Mary Flynn, are you present? Is the meeting visible and audible to you? Mary Flynn is absent. Associate members, Dan Anderson, are you present? And is the meeting visible and audible to you?
Dan Anderson	Hi, Jeff, all good.
SPEAKER_14	Thank you, Dan. Joy Jackson, are you present? And is the meeting visible and audible to you?
Joy Jackson	Present, visible, and audible.
SPEAKER_14	Thank you, Joy. And H. Theodore Cohen, can you confirm the meeting is visible and audible to you? Visible and audible. Thank you, Ted. So that means we have four planning board members present plus two associate members.
Ted Cohen	Okay, thank you, Jeff. The first item is an update from the Community Development Department. Jeff, I guess that's you. Would you please also introduce the staff present at the meeting?
SPEAKER_14	Thank you, Ted. It's me again. So Jeff Roberts, Director of Zoning and Development. Just as everyone's screens come on, I'll point out who is with me. From the Zoning and Development team, Swathi Joseph is present. We have from the Urban Design team and Community Planning and Design at CDD, Eric Thorkelson. We have, I believe that's it. Thought someone else might be joining us, but appears to be everyone from the staff team, although there are many people here with us tonight. And for tonight's meeting, we do have a number of items of business all related to the same project, essentially. So we're going to be spending the meeting talking about the Boston properties redevelopment of the Kendall Square urban redevelopment area, the MXD zoning district, and we have a few different cases that we'll get to, but I'll just jump ahead and give an update on upcoming events. We don't have many items of business looking ahead on the immediate calendar. We do expect we'll be seeing a lot more in the fall. But at this point, the only thing that we have, and I believe this is tentative because I don't think it's been fully advertised yet, but on September 30th, we have a public hearing scheduled on a zoning petition THAT WAS RECEIVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AT THE SUMMER MEETING, MARTIN BECKHALL AND OTHERS, AND THAT IS A RESIDENT VOTER-LED ZONING PETITION HAVING TO DO WITH OPEN SPACE ZONING DISTRICTS. SO WE HAVE THAT ON THE CALENDAR FOR SEPTEMBER 30TH. IF THERE'S ANY ITEMS OF BUSINESS THAT NEED TO BE SCHEDULED IN BETWEEN, ANY KIND OF GENERAL BUSINESS ITEMS, THEN STAY TUNED AND WE'LL LET EVERYBODY KNOW AND UPDATE OUR WEB PAGE. On the City Council side of things, just a few updates. There is an upcoming public hearing next week, August 27th, on the zoning petition having to do with short term rentals. The Planning Board heard that at its last meeting and gave a positive recommendation. We also, just to kind of update you on a few things that are going on outside of the ordinance committee, there are many zoning items under discussion right now at City Council. Last week there was a discussion, this was on August 14th, About the neighborhood, long term and long term planning committee about establishing some kind of limitations on unit size dwelling unit size. This was a conversation that started during the multi family zoning amendments and. is continuing to move forward. And the that committee was thinking about some some alternatives for how to move forward. So we'll be talking more about that as we get into the fall. We also have a Health and Environment Committee meeting scheduled on September, I believe it's September 16th, which will be to discuss impacts on solar access, which is something that, again, a conversation that started during the multifamily zoning amendments and something that that committee wanted to look into further. And we'll be talking a little bit more about alternatives for ways to provide greater access to solar, specifically for rooftop solar energy systems. So that is just a look ahead at what's going on. I believe that is all the updates that I have for today. So I'll turn it back over to the chair.
Ted Cohen	All right. Thank you. Are there any questions from planning board members? none appearing, then the next item is the approval of meeting minutes. The board has received certified transcripts for the meetings held on April 29th, May 6th, May 13th, and May 20th of 2025. If there are any questions from board members, please state your name and what your question is. If there are no questions, is there a motion to accept the transcripts as the meeting minutes?
Mary Lydecker	This is Mary, so moved.
Ted Cohen	Mary, thank you. Is there a second?
Ashley Tan	Ashley second.
Ted Cohen	Ashley second, thank you. Jeff, roll call vote.
SPEAKER_14	On that motion, Mary Lydecker?
SPEAKER_05	Yes.
SPEAKER_14	Ashley Tan?
SPEAKER_05	Yes.
SPEAKER_14	Carolyn Zern.
SPEAKER_05	Yes.
SPEAKER_14	And Ted Cohen. Yes. So that's all four board members present voting in favor.
Ted Cohen	Great. So the next item on the agenda is a public hearing. on cases pb 294 and pb 315 special permit amendments requests by pb cambridge center residential llc and boston properties limited partnership to share 150 long-term bicycle parking spaces at 88 ame street with 325 main street which is part of anfield infill development concept plan pursuant to section 6.108 amendment of previously approved special permit for modification of bicycle parking requirements this review is held jointly with the board of the cambridge redevelopment authority so we'll start by having the cra board officially open their meeting
SPEAKER_11	Good evening. Hi, I'm here. Thank you, everyone. I am Conrad Crawford, chair of the Cambridge Redevelopment Authority. This is the joint meeting of the CRA being held in hybrid format on August 19th. I will now call the role of CRA board members and its executive director. Please specify whether the meeting is audible to you. Please respond after I call your name. Kathleen Bourne.
SPEAKER_18	Present and the meeting is audible.
SPEAKER_11	Joe Camillus.
SPEAKER_10	Yeah, I'm here. I can hear. Philo Castore. I am present and the meeting is audible. Thank you. Aviva Rothman-Shore.
SPEAKER_12	Mr. Chair, I've gotten a text from Aviva that she's having a hard time getting into the meeting, so we're working on that.
SPEAKER_11	Yeah, we can recognize her when she joins. Executive Director Tom Evans, you heard me. I am here, and the meeting is audible. All right, CRA staff members who are presenting are also in attendance. I would also like to add, because this is a hybrid meeting, all votes will be taken by a roll call, and our Executive Director will be repeating the response of each member present.
Ted Cohen	Thank you. Before we begin, I'd like to note for the record that there are only six planning board members present to hear this case, and five votes are required to approve. Does the applicant agree to proceed with this public hearing with the six members present?
SPEAKER_17	Yeah, I... This is Jeff Lohnberg with BXP, and yes, we are okay proceeding with the six planning board members. Thank you.
Ted Cohen	Fine. Thank you very much. All right. The CDD staff will begin by summarizing why this is before us.
SPEAKER_14	Thank you, Ted. Jeff Roberts once again. And this is a request. It's one request for a modification to approved plans, but it's one of the cases that we run into from time to time where it bridges across two different special permits. This is a request that it doesn't involve new construction. It doesn't involve changes to the actual construction or development on these two sites. It's more of a use-related issue. And the request has to do with the bicycle parking spaces that were constructed for the residential use that's existing at 88 Ames Street. That was under a project review special permit. and making some of those spaces available for use by users at 325 Main Street. And this is a building that's owned by the same entity, but it was permitted under a different special permit. so the request involves amending um the special permits to authorize the um kind of essentially a reduction or a kind of sharing of spaces um that's not otherwise authorized on the residential site and to authorize the use of those spaces by um the commercial building that's um that's adjacent to it um so what this what this means is that because the one special permit is a project review special permit the board will need to grant or deny those requested amendments based on the general findings for the project review special permit The other special permit, PB 315, operates a little bit more like a PUD special permit, and it allows for major and minor amendments. So on that side, on that sort of special permit side, the owner has requested approval as a minor amendment to the infill development concept plan. So that is an action that can be taken uh with a vote uh to make a written determination that that um requested modification um represents a minor amendment and the findings both for the project review special permit and for a minor amendment under the infill development concept plan are provided in memos provided by cdv staff and that same memo provides some some comments including comments that have been CONVEYED BY OUR TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT, WHICH HAS WORKED VERY CLOSELY WITH THE APPLICANT ON THIS REQUEST. SO WE'RE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THE BOARD MIGHT HAVE AS WE GO ALONG. WITH THAT, I'LL TURN IT BACK OVER.
Ted Cohen	ANY QUESTIONS FOR CDD STAFF? IF NOT, THEN THE CRA STAFF WISH TO GIVE ITS INTRODUCTION AND WHAT ACTION WILL BE TAKEN BY THE CRA.
SPEAKER_12	Sure. Thank you, Ted, and thanks, Jeff, for that introduction. For the record, this is Tom Evans with the Cambridge Redevelopment Authority. So this action for the planning board is actually something that CRA does not need to take an active vote on tonight unless there's a significant change to the proposal. Originally, the 325 Main Street proposal had come in with bike parking located partially in the basement of the building and then also having short-term retail parking. on the plaza. And when that first came to us, we've been working for a while to find other locations for that parking. The CRA had granted some revisions to an easement to provide an area for Google's required parking under the commercial parking requirements. But fortunately, a tenant at 325 Google wants more bike parking. So they picked up on our interest in that mode of transmission to Kendall Square. And so they've been seeking additional space for bike parking for their employees at the same time. we've seen that the Ames Street bike parking has not been fully utilized. So we've been going back and forth on some different design solutions on this. And finally, in last year, the CRA had approved a motion approving the revisions to the bike parking distribution for 88 Ames and 325, utilizing a shared parking requirement. Since then, that's been refined a little bit more. And that's the proposal list before the planning board today. So here to answer any other questions as well that may come up for planning board or CRA board members.
Ted Cohen	Thank you, Tom. If there are no questions, then we'd ask the proponent to make their presentation. Mr. Lowenberg, I understand you're making the presentation. You'll have up to 30 minutes for your presentation that we hope you can be as concise as possible. Would you please introduce your project team and begin?
SPEAKER_17	YEAH, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, MEMBERS OF BOTH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CRA BOARD. NICE TO BE HERE TONIGHT. AND I CERTAINLY WON'T NEED 30 MINUTES. WITH ME TONIGHT IS MY COLLEAGUE AT PXP, CATALINA PIDEA, HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AS WELL. BUT OTHERWISE, I'M JUST GOING TO WALK THROUGH JUST KIND OF AN OVERVIEW OF THE REQUEST. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THE PRESENTATION IS VISIBLE. Can people see it? Great, thanks. So just to kind of provide a little bit of context, as Jeff Roberts described, this request involves two kind of separate special permits. So PB 294, is a special permit associated with 88 ame street also known as the proto apartments um so as i walk through this and in some of the graphics you'll see proto sometimes you'll see 88 ames those are in fact the the same residential tower on ame street so that special permit was approved in in 2015 and occupied in in 2018 so that residential building which has 280 UNITS HAS BEEN OPEN FOR YOU KNOW APPROXIMATELY SEVEN YEARS AND THEN SEPARATELY PB 315 WHICH IS THE IDCP THAT HAS BEEN AMENDED A COUPLE OF TIMES BUT THE ORIGINAL PB 315 WAS APPROVED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF 145 BROADWAY A SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENT TO THAT IDCP SPECIAL PERMIT 315 INCLUDED THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION OF 325 MAIN STREET, WHICH WE'RE HERE TO TALK ABOUT TONIGHT. AND THEN JUST FOR CONTEXT, THAT SAME IDC PROJECT WAS AMENDED A SECOND TIME TO INCLUDE THE EVERSOURCE SUBSTATION 250, 290 BINNY, AND 121 BROADWAY, WHICH IS ANOTHER RESIDENTIAL BUILDING. just want to be clear that the request tonight with respect to special permit 315 only involves 325 main street there are no proposed changes at all to 145 broadway or the amendment two buildings um just providing those for context in terms of 325 maine as a that amendment was approved in 2019 THE BUILDING WAS OCCUPIED IN 2022. SO WHILE WE HAVE ABOUT SEVEN YEARS OF OPERATING EXPERIENCE AT THE RESIDENTIAL BUILDING, WE ALSO HAVE ABOUT THREE YEARS OF EXPERIENCE AT 325 MAINE. AND SO THIS REQUEST REALLY, AS COM DESCRIBED, IS REALLY ABOUT TRYING TO BETTER UTILIZE PARKING FACILITIES. AND WE'LL WALK YOU THROUGH KIND OF SOME OF THE NUMBERS AND SOME OF THE DATA. BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S BOTH JEFF AND TOM, WE'VE HAD NUMEROUS MEETINGS WITH CRA STAFF, CDD STAFF, TRANSPORTATION TO KIND OF WALK THROUGH THE DETAILS OF THIS. I'll kind of just provide, here's a site plan, just so you understand the adjacencies of the two buildings. So 88 Ames Street here, which is the residential tower, sits kind of on the western side of the block, 325 Main, IT SITS ON KIND OF THE MID-SOUTHERN PART OF IT, BUT THESE BUILDINGS ARE VERY CLOSE TO EACH OTHER. WE'RE GOING TO TALK A BIT ABOUT THE BIKE SHED, WHICH IS A THREE-STORY BIKE FACILITY THAT WAS BUILT AS PART OF THE PROTO OR 88 AIM STREET. WE'LL KIND OF GO THROUGH THE DETAILS OF THAT. THE CURRENT 325 LONG-TERM BIKE PARKING IS LOCATED WITHIN THE FOOTPRINT OF THE 325. SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'LL SHOW YOU IS THAT THERE'S BEEN A VERY LOW UTILIZATION OF THE BIKE PARKING AT 88 AIMS AND AN INCREASED DEMAND FOR PARKING AT 325. FORTUNATELY, THE PROPOSAL FOR SHARING THE PROTO SPACE IS SPECIFICALLY IN THE BIKE SHED IS VERY CLOSE WITHIN 50 FEET OF THE ENTRANCE OF 325 MAINE. SO THE PROXIMITY HERE IS VERY HELPFUL. I'M GOING TO WALK YOU THROUGH KIND OF IN MORE DETAIL THE LOCATION OF THE BIKE PARKING. JUST A QUICK WARNING, AS I TURN THE PAGE HERE, THE SITE PLAN GETS KIND OF SHIFTED 180. SO HERE YOU HAVE BROADWAY TO THE NORTH OF THE TOP OF THE PAGE, MAIN STREET ON THE BOTTOM. AS WE LOOK AT THE DETAILED LOCATIONS OF THE BIKE The site plan does get rotated. So here is the site plan and we kind of have this exploded version just to show the different levels and the different parking. But here you have Broadway on the bottom here, Ames Street here. So the proto building is planned right. 325 MAIN HERE IS KIND OF PLAN TOP, IF YOU WILL. SO JUST TO UNDERSTAND WHERE THE EXISTING BIKE PARKING IS AT 88 AIMS, THERE'S A TOTAL OF 295 LONG-TERM BICYCLE SPACES. OKAY, IF YOU START AT THE BOTTOM, AS I MENTIONED, THIS BIKE SHED IS A THREE-LEVEL BIKE SHED THAT'S ATTACHED ESSENTIALLY ADJACENT TO THIS GREEN GARAGE. SO THERE'S 54 SPACES ON THE GROUND FLOOR AND THEN 48 ON SECOND FLOOR AND ANOTHER 48 ON THE THIRD FLOOR. SO IF YOU ADD IN THOSE THREE LEVELS OF BIKE SHED PARKING, IT'S 150 BICYCLE SPACES. On the fifth level, there's another 113 bike parking spaces. The fifth level is really important. This is the level that's immediately connected into the residential. So if you are a resident of Proto, their preference and where we've seen all the bike parking is on this fifth level of the garage, because they can walk right into the building from that fifth level. And then finally, there's another 32 long-term spaces within the green garage. for a total of 295 long-term spaces. And then there's an additional 42 short-term spaces that are out primarily on Ames Street. So what has been happening at 88 and Ames Street in terms of the utilization of parking? So a couple of different uh data points here i want to start with the right hand side which is the 88 uh ame street apartment occupancy percentage which is the gray line at the top so in 2018 to 2019 we were in leasing up that building and since that time occupancy of the building is has been essentially 90 plus percent so headline here is the building's been full not surprising with this type of building but essentially the building's been full from an occupancy standpoint from a bike parking standpoint this the bottom part of the graph kind of demonstrates the the low utilization of the bike parking so the blue the blue bars is the number of bikes which is on the left or on the numbers on top here so you know you can see it fluctuating but at the At the peak, if you will, it's been 48, again, out of the 295 available bike parking at 88 Ames, we've only recorded 48 as the max, which is about 18%. The yellow-orange line basically just provides that in a percentage. You can see that. So that kind of tops out. at about 18 to 20%. And you may ask given, you know, the frequency of bikes, why we're seeing such a low utilization. One, there are a number of blue bike stations as part of our PTDM requirements. We are providing blue bike memberships as part of the initial residents. So a number of residents are utilizing blue bikes. Obviously the T is right next door. So a lot of people are using the T in terms of transportation. Uh, and then finally there are a low number, but there are some residents that are, are storing their bicycles within their units as well. Um, but that just gives you a flavor for it. So, uh, um, you know, we, we just had a situation where as, as again, Tom has described, we had very, very low utilization over quite a period of, of operations on the bike parking. at 88 Ames. And then subsequently we have Google who occupies 325 Maine has now been in the building for a number of years and seeing their demand for bike parking increase. And so, you know, as, as, as you know, the K2 plan and the zoning really contemplates, there is the ability to share this parking in a, in a mixed use basis. And that's, WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TONIGHT. AND SO SPECIFICALLY, THESE LAST TWO SLIDES JUST KIND OF SUMMARIZE WHAT THE REQUESTED CHANGES ARE FOR EACH OF THE SPECIAL PERMITS. SO FOR 88 AIM STREET SPECIAL PERMIT 294, YOU KNOW, THE LEVEL FIVE OF THAT GREEN GARAGE, WHICH I MENTIONED, IS CONNECTED INTO THE BUILDING. THOSE 113 SPACES, WE'RE NOT PROPOSING ANY CHANGES THAT WILL REMAIN 100% PARKING FOR 88 AIMS. AND AGAIN, GIVEN THE 48 MAX THAT WE'VE SEEN, CERTAINLY PROVIDES A LOT OF CAPACITY FOR BIKE PARKING. AND THEN THOSE 150 SPACES ON THE THREE LEVELS OF BIKE SHED, WE'RE PROPOSING TO SHARE THOSE USES BETWEEN PROTO AND 325 MAINE. IN ADDITION, WHICH WE'LL TALK ABOUT ON THE NEXT SLIDE FOR 325 MAINE, THE GROUND FLOOR OF THAT BIKE We're also proposing to use it as short-term parking for 325 Main. So those spaces would be open not only to Proto residents, 325 Main employees, as well as the public, anybody looking for short-term bike parking. And then, in terms of 325 main a couple things in terms of the long term bike parking there under zoning 108 long term bicycle spaces are required as part of kind of doing this due diligence and working through these details we discovered. We were for sure in our bike room. And so to remain compliant with zoning we're requesting that for the spaces that are going to be shared in the bike shed on levels two and three be counted as long term bike parking for 325 main. On the short term spaces, as Tom mentioned, we had proposed locating those on main street on Kendall Plaza, Pioneer Way, et cetera. And I think, you know, with discussions with city staff, CRA staff, it just felt that there could be a better option to solve the long-term bike parking and people with retail. And so that's why we're proposing those short-term spaces to be located into that dedicated bike shed location on the ground floor. It's very close to the entrance of 325. um within 50 feet um and and so these are uh so that's the 47 short term would be located within the ground floor of the bike shed and then um you know these are the requested 325 changes the the piece of the sharing is actually reflected in the the requested changes to 88 ame street um I'LL STOP THERE. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. AGAIN, THIS IS OUR ASK TO REALLY TRY TO BETTER UTILIZE THE EXISTING BIKE PARKING FACILITIES AND TRY TO BALANCE THE DEMAND AND SUPPLY PIECE. I'LL TURN IT BACK TO THE CHAIR. THANK YOU.
Ted Cohen	Thank you. All right, so this is a public hearing and we will start with public comment. Any members of the public who wish to speak should now click the button that says raise hands. If you're calling in by phone, you can raise your hand by pressing star nine. As of 5 p.m. yesterday, the board had received no written comments on this case. Written communications received after 5 p.m. yesterday will be entered into the record. Jeff, I don't know if...
SPEAKER_14	Sorry, I was having a little trouble unmuting. So this is Jeff Roberts. I don't see any hands raised in the attendees. I'll just repeat the instructions you gave in case anyone's still trying to figure out what to do. So this is the public hearing session of the bicycle parking request. That's the part of the agenda that we're on. If anyone who is attending would like to make a comment on that, please push the raise hand button on Zoom. And if you're contacting us by phone, press star nine on your phone. You just need to press the button once and your hand will go up. We'll see that you would like to say something. I'll give it a few seconds. So still not seeing any hands go up. I think at this point I'll turn it back over to the chair to continue with the case. I'll know just since I'm talking that Adam Schulman from the Department of Transportation has also joined us at the meeting in case in case there's any questions for for that department.
Ted Cohen	okay well thank you jeff um so we'll now move on to uh from public comment uh to the board discussion um if there are any board members who have any questions we'll start with that and then we will move on to board discussion A note we have received written materials from CDD staff and the staff are available to answer any questions. And I. The.
SPEAKER_02	Sorry one moment.
Ted Cohen	Okay. Dan, your hand's up. You want to start?
Dan Anderson	Yeah, thank you very much, Ted. So, Dan Anderson, a comment and a question. This seems eminently reasonable and I'm entirely supportive of it. The question is the use of the access into the bike shed from Ames Street, so between 325 Main and Proto. This is a curb cut. Just thinking a little bit about Obviously it's it's fairly low utilization, but are people coming in from the dedicated bike lane in through that. call it an alley for lack of a better word at the moment and. Is that predominantly the route for the bikes and I guess the follow on is is that shared with with vehicular traffic appreciate the response.
SPEAKER_17	Yeah, I think, you know, as always with bikes, there's, you know, people find their way. But I would say the primary access would be off of an existing curb cut on Ames Street back into the bike shed here. There is a loading dock here for the residential. It doesn't get a lot of use, but there is a loading dock there. We do have a dock manager there that is actively managing that area. ZONE RIGHT HERE ALSO THERE IS AN EXIT TO THE GARAGE THAT IS ONLY AN EXIT IT'S NOT AN ENTRANCE AND IT IS BASICALLY USED KIND OF AT THE RUSH HOUR THERE ARE HOURS ASSOCIATED WITH IT SO BUT THERE YOU KNOW THAT THERE'S BUT THAT IS THE PRIMARY ACCESS THERE IS ALSO A PUBLIC CORRIDOR OFF FROM THE PLAZA DOWN WHAT WE REFER TO AS PIONEER WAY that somebody would be able to walk. If they're coming from the east, they could walk their bike through a dedicated public corridor and then come back out of the alley and go into the bike shed. There's a door on both the east and the west sides of the bike shed.
Dan Anderson	Okay, so there is some shared interaction between cars and pedestrians and vehicles, but I'm guessing with the low volume, that's not presenting any problem. So there's no dedicated separated space, anything like that. No. Right. Great. Thank you.
Ted Cohen	You. Any other board members have any questions or comments? All right. Well, if none are appearing. then are we prepared to take action on the requested amendment for planning board 294 the actions we could take would be to move to grant the special permit with or without conditions after making findings that the proposal conforms to the applicable criteria in the zoning ordinance We could move to deny the special permit or move to continue the hearing to a future date. I would assume that we're prepared to move forward to grant the special permit. In order to act on that, we need to appoint the two associate members to act on this. That would be Dan and Joy. And in order to go forward, we have to make the following findings. We would need to determine that the proposals can consistent with the purposes of section 6.1 and that the bicycle parking plan proposes a quantity design and arrangements of bicycle parking that will serve bicycle unit users in a way that is sufficiently comparable given the circumstances of the specific project to the bicycle parking that would be required under the regulations of section 6.1 6.100 The bicycle parking plan will satisfactorily serve the needs of all expected users based on quantitative and or qualitative evidence provided by the applicant. In addition, we would have to find that The amendment meets the general special permit criteria in section 10.43, which we're all pretty familiar with. Is there any question that anybody has whether we can make the finding that it meets the requirement of being consistent with the purposes of section 6.100? We'll see no opposition to that. Then somebody made making a motion to grant the special permit subject to the conditions that are set forward in the CDD memo, which are the general conditions of continuing to review the matter and review any further changes. Is there someone who would be willing to make that motion to grant?
Carolyn Zern	This is Carolyn, so moved.
Ted Cohen	And is there a second? I guess I'll second. Dan is second, thank you. Jeff, can we take a roll call vote on that?
SPEAKER_14	Yes, on that motion, Mary Lydecker?
SPEAKER_05	Yes.
SPEAKER_14	Ashley Tan?
SPEAKER_05	Yes.
SPEAKER_14	Carolyn Zern?
SPEAKER_05	Yes.
SPEAKER_14	Dan Anderson? Yes. Joy Jackson.
SPEAKER_05	Yes.
SPEAKER_14	And Ted Cohen. Yeah. So that's all six members present voting in favor.
Ted Cohen	All right. Thank you. Now, are we also prepared to make a determination on the requested amendment to Planning Board 315 with regard to 325 Main Street? In order to make that, we have to first determine whether this is a minor amendment or a major amendment. minor amendments or changes would not alter the concept of the pud in terms of density floor area ratio land use height provision of open space or the physical relationship of elements of the development minor amendments shall include but not be limited to small changes in the location of buildings open space or parking or realignment of miners minor streets the A major amendment would mean that we could not make that finding and that it would then have to go forward on with two hearings. Are we prepared to determine that this is a minor amendment? Again, we will need to appoint both Dan and Joy to act upon this matter. I'm assuming that we're prepared to go forward with determining that this is a minor amendment based upon the presentation and CDD's memo. Can I have a motion to determine that the proposed changes constitute a minor amendment and can be approved by a written determination?
Mary Lydecker	This is Mary. So moved.
Ted Cohen	Mary, thank you. And is there a second?
Ashley Tan	Ashley, second.
Ted Cohen	Ashley, second. Thank you. Jeff, roll call vote on that.
SPEAKER_14	On that motion, Mary Lydecker?
SPEAKER_05	Yes.
SPEAKER_14	Ashley Tan?
SPEAKER_05	Yes.
SPEAKER_14	Carolyn Zirin?
SPEAKER_05	Yes.
SPEAKER_14	Dan Anderson? Yes. Joy Jackson?
SPEAKER_05	Yes.
SPEAKER_14	Ted Cohen? Yes. That's all six members voting in favor.
Ted Cohen	Thank you. Thank you to the proponent. Good luck. Now, does the CRA Board need to take any action with regard to this matter?
SPEAKER_12	Thank you, Ted. No, the CRA Board does not need to take any action at this time.
Ted Cohen	Okay. Thank you. Well, then we will move on to the next item on our agenda. which is a design update on case pb 315 a previously granted special permit and part of the infill development concept plan for the mxd zoning district by boston properties limited partnership again cdd staff will summarize why this is before us jeff
SPEAKER_14	Thank you, Ted. I'll do this. This is more in the urban design wheelhouse at this point, but I'll give the quick intro. So this is the same special program we talked about before, PB 315, which is the MXD district infill development concept plan. The planning board has reviewed various components of this under the design review provisions of that special permit. And today the permittee is here with an update on the design of two of the elements of that plan one is the center Plaza that's the uh the primary uh public open space that will be created on top of the electrical substation vault and then the east-west connector which is a pathway that connects to that open space and and other open space in the area so there have been updates to design um the planning board uh had actually asked to see these designs as they evolved and so i i think the the permittee has um been been willing to come back and and advance uh the conversation and get input the planning board's role in these matters um is not uh at this time to approve or deny the changes but to provide comments and feedback because this is in the continuing design review realm so urban design uh staff uh and again Eric Thorkelson is is present um to to represent that team um to discuss this um they're they're engaged uh and as well as the um the redevelopment authorities uh design review committee which has uh planning board member representatives on it so I uh any other questions I'll probably defer to Eric but I'm happy to turn it over there
Ted Cohen	Eric, is there anything you want to add at this time?
SPEAKER_18	Oh, no, I think go ahead with the presentation and we might have a few comments afterwards. And I think the CRA does too. I think presentation first would make sense.
Ted Cohen	So, fine, thank you. Mr. Lowenberg, then, if you're starting the presentation again, would you please do? Again, you'll have up to 30 minutes for your presentation. We hope you can, again, be as concise as possible. And if there are any other people you need to introduce from your team, please introduce them and begin.
SPEAKER_17	Great. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Jeff Lowenberg with BXP to provide this update. LET ME JUST MENTION THE TEAM MEMBERS THAT WERE HERE. FIRST FROM BXP, CATALINA PADILLA IS HERE ALONG WITH ME. SASAKI, WHO IS THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS, MO GOMEZ AND STEVE INGLER ARE HERE. I BELIEVE MO IS GOING TO SHARE THE PRESENTATION AS WE GET GOING. ALSO HERE WITH THE ARCHITECT OF OUR STRUCTURE CLADDING, MBBJ, GRASALDI, AND THEN FINALLY STANTEC ARCHITECTS, NICOLE CHIN IS HERE. STANTEC IS PLAYING KIND OF AN OVERALL COORDINATION ROLE ON ALL ELEMENTS OF OUR PROJECT. AND... HEY, JEFF.
SPEAKER_15	REAL QUICK, I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT, KELLY PERRELL FROM SITSAKI IS ALSO HERE. OH, GREAT. ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT? THANK YOU, STEVE.
SPEAKER_17	APPRECIATE THAT. SO IF YOU WANT TO JUST GO TO THE TABLE OF CONTENTS, I'M JUST GOING TO DO A LITTLE BIT OF OF, AGAIN, CONTEXT LEVEL SETTING, BUT REALLY ALLOW THE DESIGNERS TO PROVIDE THE UPDATES. SO JUST AS A COUPLE OF IMPORTANT KIND OF DATES HERE. SO WE WERE LAST IN FRONT OF THE JOINT CRA BOARD AND PLANNING BOARD IN DECEMBER OF 2024, SO ABOUT EIGHT MONTHS AGO. AT THAT POINT, WE DID RECEIVE APPROVAL ON OUR CONCEPTUAL DESIGN FOR THE CENTER PLAZA. WHICH AS JEFF MENTIONED IS THE PUBLIC OPEN SPACE ABOVE THE SUBSTATION. WE'LL HAVE A SUBSEQUENT UPDATE ON THE EAST WEST CONNECTOR, BUT THE FIRST ONE IS GOING TO BE ON THE PLAZA. SO ONE OF THE, THERE WAS A CONDITION OF THE APPROVAL IN DECEMBER OF 2024 TO INVOLVE THE PLANNING BOARD WANTED TO KIND OF BE INVOLVED. SO THE FIRST ONE WAS TO PROVIDE THIS UPDATE, WHICH WE'RE DOING TONIGHT. AND THEN BETWEEN DECEMBER OF 24 AND THE UPDATE TONIGHT, THERE WAS ONGOING KIND OF DESIGN REVIEW THROUGH THE CRA'S DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE. AND THAT COMMITTEE, WHICH IS MADE UP FROM CRA BOARD MEMBERS, BARRY ZEVIN, CATHY BORN, AND BILO CASTORI, AND THEN FROM THE PLANNING BOARD, BOTH MARY Lydecker AND ASHLEY TAN PARTICIPATED IN THOSE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE SESSIONS. ERIC FROM CDD STAFF WAS PART OF THAT DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AND WE HAD LOTS OF INPUT FROM CRA STAFF AS WELL. AND SO WHAT WE DID AFTER THE DECEMBER 24 KIND OF CONCEPTUAL DESIGN, WE WENT INTO DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PHASE AND WE BASICALLY GOT TO 50% DD DESIGN WE ISSUED THAT TO THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AND THEN WE HELD A REVIEW ON APRIL 2ND OF 2025. THERE WERE A NUMBER OF COMMENTS THAT WE ADDRESSED FROM THE DECEMBER KIND OF PLANNING BOARD, CRA BOARD MEETING. WE GOT A LOT OF OTHER COMMENTS AND WE KIND OF INCORPORATED THAT IN AND THEN COMPLETED OUR 100% design development drawings and submitted that back to the design review committee in the CRA, and we all met to review the 100% DDs on June 4th of 2025. And I won't speak for the design review committee. I'll just say a couple of things. One, really appreciate it. We really thought it was a A REALLY GOOD COLLABORATIVE EFFORT. WE GOT A LOT OF COMMENTS. WE ARE ADDRESSING THEM. WE'RE FEELING REALLY GOOD ABOUT WHERE THE PROJECT IS FROM A DESIGN STANDPOINT AS WE GET READY TO ENTER THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT PHASE. AND SO WE'RE FEELING REALLY GOOD ABOUT MOST OF THE PROJECT ELEMENTS. I THINK THE ONE KIND OF, I DON'T KNOW IF UNRESOLVED IS THE RIGHT WORD, BUT WE HAD LOTS OF DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE CHILDREN'S PLAY AREA. AND SO AS PART OF KIND OF BRINGING FORWARD THIS UPDATE, WE'VE KIND OF COME UP WITH A COUPLE OF OPTIONS TRYING TO INCORPORATE AGAIN THE FEEDBACK THAT WE'VE RECEIVED OVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS ON THE PLACE. SO WE ARE GOING TO PRESENT A COUPLE OF OPTIONS. WOULD REALLY LIKE TO HEAR THE FEEDBACK FROM THE COLLECTIVE GROUP HERE ON THOSE TWO OPTIONS. But otherwise, you know, I think again, we're, we're feeling really good and happy to provide this update with that. I'm going to turn it over to Sasaki and I don't know, Mo, are you going to kick it off here? Yeah, I'll take it from here. Thanks, Jeff. Thank you.
SPEAKER_13	Thanks for the updates. So as Jeff mentioned, we're going to do an update on the design progress on the center Plaza project, the actual Plaza piece we're going to present now. And then Steve Engler from Sasaki will present. The portion related to the east-west connector is a separate design update following this presentation. So today we're going to focus on the plaza and the plaza updates. This illustrative plan illustrates the previous site plan that was presented back in November and as Jeff mentioned, there were a number of comments that were received back at those meetings and subsequent meetings thereafter. And the sort of general gist of all of those comments This really culminates into these sort of six key items. We took a look at the nooks or those seating areas. We made updates to a number of different conditions for seating based around the comments and feedback that we got. We made some updates and revisions to the swing elements and added actually swing elements to that north, sorry, west area of the site underneath the trellis to provide a little bit of amenity looking out over the lawn area. Generally across the board, I have it highlighted as planter updates, not necessarily to that one planter, but generally all the planters. We made more robust planting and overall planting updates. The views that you'll see now also try to match or create a sort of ambiance or experience that's as close to what the specified intended plants are. So we've made updates to that, both to the views and to the design. made some adjustments to the pathway updates, and you'll see some alignment tweaks in there. And then as Jeff mentioned at the end, we do have two options for the playground, so we have some updates to share there too. And so what you'll see here is the updated plan that we're presenting today, with the exception of the play area, which is illustrating one of the options, and we'll show another option thereafter. So I'm just going to walk through some details of this plan and how those updates have been incorporated throughout. Here you can see a juxtaposition of the previous plan together with the current site plan. Generally, the overall layout is still the same from what we had from the concept design standpoint, but a series of those refinements, if you look carefully, you can see some of the updates to the planters, the overall layout of the lawn area, some of the areas of the planters, and then again, the play area updates. So as we look at this we're going to start with a bird's eye view that we had typically used to show an overhead. Of the entire condition, this is the previous design, you can see the layout and general location of the elements and then the subsequent updates to that same condition. From this view it's a good vantage point to see some of the updates, especially to the planting and sort of adding a little bit more robustness to all the planting areas, many of them increased in size, trying to get. more green where we could and also more robust planting where we could to try and maximize the condition of enclosure that we heard from last time. And also getting as much variety of planting throughout the entire space. As we look from the area here, looking from the beacon building out towards the exhaust building, this pathway, this is the old previous alignment that we saw. And the subsequent updates to that now meant that not only do we increase some of the planting areas, we also made the nooks and these seating areas a little bit more variegated, have even more opportunity and more different kind of conditions for people to sit at. We also incorporated more areas for flexible, movable furnishings. And you can see that illustrated here. Another modification that we made based on comments and feedback was also making the pathway a little bit more, have a more unique sort of design condition, adding a little bit more unique textures to the paving surfaces, as well as one sort of major adjustment that we did make was making a cant in the walkway to then gain a little bit more room for some of the planting, a little bit more room for some of the play area. And you can see that on the upper side of the page where instead of a straight alignment, We have it curving, allowing you to sort of amble through this space, but still getting you to that main access point on the east side of the site. Here you can see a view from the lawn from the previous design, the condition there. Generally that same effect is still in place, but here you can see with this view, all the plantings have been updated to more accurately reflect the intent of the specified planting. Generally, you can see the intent of the beacon building, the intake building is still the same. But off to the right, you can see the incorporation of new swing structures added into the trellis area with their own unique seating area, little nooks actually associated with those as well too. From the west service drive looking out, this is the previous design showing you the example from there. And as we shift to the current design, Here you can see we also made some modifications to the planting on this west side service drive. We still incorporated the nooks on some of these areas and the planters, especially underneath the trellis, but made them a little shallower to try and increase the amount of planting available underneath the trellis area and added some detail to the exhaust building to give it a more vibrant sort of condition on the west service drive face there. Here's a view from the east service drive from the previous condition. And some of the feedback we got not only was with regards to the actual view and condition of the planting, but also this idea of this alignment that went through the site was a pretty direct path. And so we did make it slightly askew, allowing us to get actually a little bit more area for the play space, which actually helped, and allowed us to also increase some of the planting area, getting even more green space. There, and so this updated view, you can see the alignment shifted slightly, allowing us to still get through the path, through the site, the plaza the same way as we had before, but allowed us to get even more larger planting spaces adjacent to the decks area, the sort of recreational outdoor upper level, and then having the additional planting adjacent to the playground area to get you a little bit more enclosure to that along the east side, east service drive. And so, as Jeff mentioned, the one thing we are looking for additional feedback on, and we had a very engaging session the last time when we did talk about it, we got a lot of comments, a lot of good input, and tried to take all that and meld it together and make some updates, both in terms of The wood scheme that we had been showing, we got feedback that, you know, there's this idea that maybe it's wood, maybe it's a colorful structure. There was a preference to keep the wood, but not necessarily use that sort of very rustic aesthetic, so we've made updates there. We looked at making that enhancement to the planting, which you saw from some of those views, especially from the east side, east service drive. Then the variety and type of engagement in the play, making a more immersive experience. We did focus on Making sure that we had a variety of experiences, not just active physical play, but also sensory and engage play, as well as adding some didactic elements around the play area. To even just add one more element of fun for the kids and then just making sure we have adequate long term lighting and durability, which is. My main driver, regardless of the option. So. Basically, it boiled down to looking at these two options. And the way we looked at it was the first one is the bird's nest and the second one is what we're calling the beehive. The bird's nest option is an option that really would tap into a kid's interest in birds and all types of birds features, but also being able to be a way to showcase quite literally like a bird in that space or little birds in that space. Looking at different options available to us, we did find these unique sort of little bird element features. You can see here an overall aerial view with these two birds sort of facing each other at the main entrance to the play area space to sort of give you this presentation as the gateway and access into the play area. And then some leaf climbing structures and then a taller structure anchoring the peak of that corner to give a little bit more variety for the older children. From the east side, east service drive, you can see that experience of the play area. The taller tower in the top would provide a slide, climbing elements, some type of enclosure elements underneath and on top and within, whereas the lower features are more focused towards the younger toddler range. But here you can start to see the elements around the periphery that would have different types of features, and you'll see that again in another area. From this view here, you can see the area for play that's more focused on the younger kids, the toddlers, the two little birds facing each other, color to be able to match, you know, birds that are typical throughout the Massachusetts or Cambridge area. Around the periphery here, you can start to see some of the elements that would be added to the edge. and really making that edge feel part of the park and the playground space using some of those wood features, not necessarily stepping away a little bit from that rustic condition and adding more refined wood elements like these birds, the taller tower, as well as sort of this edge around the outside. And sorry, one other feature here is the, in this case, we could have some undulating elements and actually can't then incur the ground plane to give kids some, some more variety in that space for play. The access and entrance into the playground area, you can see here looking in the intake building is off to the right. You can see the tower on the left-hand side. Here you can see the entrance to this. As you enter through, you would see some of those bird features in the background. And here we're showing this option with a gate. It could or could not have a gate. And likewise with the other one, could or could not have a gate, but this is just showing you. option here that could incorporate something like that. And then just to conclude the overall bird's nest view again looking back towards the east service drive see the culmination and its relationship to the overall intake building. The seating underneath the trellis at the intake building provides an opportunity for parents to be able to watch the entire play space. There's also seating at the other end of it to give parents a access throughout adjacent seating would also have accommodation, not only for wheelchairs but for strollers and. spaces like that. Within this space, just to give a little bit more detail, we do have allocated elements for the two to five year old play range. Those are the bird features that leaf climbing structure and some of the stepping logs. The larger timber tower is more directed at the 5- to 12-year-old play. It doesn't preclude the younger kids. There's some features on the bottom that the younger kids could play with, but it's directed more towards the older play. Around the outside of the play area, in this case, we would have that wood sort of element, the fencing element type thing that would incorporate all types of different sensory and more hands-on type of plays, so mirrors, concave, convex, to give you that sense of, when the kids look at it, the sensory play boards along the back edge to give a whole variety. And then throughout this space, because we have such a large area here too on the inside of that play area, the incorporation of educational panels regarding birds. So it would be anything from very didactic, literal educational features, or perhaps some story or narrative about birds that is incorporated as a sequence that you could follow along the whole way. And that's something we're still exploring, but thinking about what the opportunities are with that. Option two, we're calling the beehive. This one then focuses on bees in particular. A previous scheme that we had been showing was really, we called it a pollinator garden before, had a lot of elements, a lot of vibrancy and many things happening. And I guess one of the feedback, some feedback that we got from from some of the meetings was thinking about maybe there's a way to pare this down. And I believe it was even thinking about the bees in particular. And we sort of took that to heart and said, let's focus around the bees and think about how we could really make the bee playground something really exciting. And so we're calling this the beehive. And in the beehive scheme, again, the layout of the outline stays the same. But in this case, it's really focused around the idea of these bees. and thinking about how you can incorporate features. So when you, here's an overall view again, the aerial. You can see here at the top at the entrance, there's a bee element that kids can climb on, they can climb underneath. Fun little climbing structure for the younger kids, but really starts to set the tone for what this could look like. Once you enter, you see all these hex forms, much like the honeycomb structure, incorporated both in the ground plane on the edges, but also as a smaller climbing feature for the toddlers. located down at the bottom left here of the screen, but also a much larger feature for the 5- to 12-year-olds. It's also hex-like in its condition, but offering a different type of play than that tower structure that we saw before. This one would still have a slide, but a bunch of nets, and you'll see those elements in a moment. Here you can see from the East Service Drive that net climbing structure. So taking that idea of the hex form, extruding it all up, and creating different types of features. One is a large net that you can climb up into. One is the feature that gets you up to the top of the slide. Another one is one that you can stand on and bounce on. And there's features, again, around the periphery of this for the smaller kids, but it's really focused towards the five to 12-year-olds. Here you can also start to see what that experience is like around the periphery, those edges, text-like forms that would incorporate, again, the sensory type of play, maybe some narrative features for educational pieces about bees. All throughout, you can see the same forms for the seating the the pole structures that would hold up this element would be a similar material to what we're doing on the intake building, so there would be a complement of materials. But really accentuating the the hive type of approach using more yellows and darker colors like the blacks with the bees. Here from this view, you can see the view associated with what would be more toddler type of place on the left. is that bee climbing structure. Kids can go on top of it. They can sneak in underneath. The feature on the right is another type of climbing structure with a different type of challenges. Also on the front side of that would be panels that kids could play with and interact with and then climb under and through, much in that hex-like beehive form. And then for this gateway into the beehive, In this case, we're showing it more open. Here you can see the opening leading you right to that little B to draw kids into it, but you would also see and hint at all those hex forms from the outside drawing you into that space. And then here you can see the overall view with the intake on the right. Again, the seating would still be the same, offering the wheelchair access, stroller access. But you can see the different features here. In this case, you have the The two to five-year-olds, again, all on the left. The different features here are that bee. There's a bee springer to give a little bit more active play to the kids, a physically active play. The beehive climber. And then again, that large structure. All the same type of similar types of sensory play and mirror type elements would be around the periphery. And again, similar to like the birds, we could have educational features throughout perhaps a narrative that goes all the way through this. that kids could track with their parents throughout, something along those lines. We're still working on the details of that. Oh, and the bottom feature of both of those, again, the Beehive Tower would have elements for the younger kids too. So here they are, the play options, sort of just snippets of them together just for the purposes of discussion to see them relatively side by side. And we have elements here at the appendix that we could go back to if needed to reference any of the other features. I'll conclude with this to get feedback and input specifically on the play.
Ted Cohen	Are you going to go on with the east-west connector at this point?
SPEAKER_12	Oh, we can.
SPEAKER_16	Whatever your preference is, we can do the other update or we can get some feedback here and then do that update. Whatever the preference of the boards is, we're happy to do it either way.
Ted Cohen	Dave Kuntz, To board members have any particular preference. Dave Kuntz, I think, why don't we have all the presentations and then we can. Dave Kuntz, You know.
SPEAKER_13	Dave Kuntz, Somebody just group together all our questions. Dave Kuntz, Okay i'll turn it over to Steve angler who will present from Sasaki for the east, west connector.
SPEAKER_15	Dave Kuntz, i'm. Can everyone see my screen here OK? Yeah. So I mentioned to introduce the project we are in the update on the east west connection design. CONNECTOR DESIGN DID INCLUDE A PLAY AREA WHICH ARE SORT OF MOVING TO THE CENTER PLAZA WITH A NEW UPDATED DESIGN AND SO WE'RE SHOWING THE DESIGN FOR WHAT THAT CENTER OR EAST WEST CONNECTOR WILL LOOK LIKE. JEFF DO YOU WANT TO STEP IN AND TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE HIGH FLAG?
SPEAKER_17	YEAH YEAH JUST REALLY QUICK THIS THIS SHOULD BE A FAIRLY QUICK UPDATE IT'S A FAIRLY LIMITED SPACE BUT THE REASON WHY WE'RE KIND OF DOING THIS AS A SEPARATE UPDATE IS THAT THIS EAST WEST CONNECTOR WAS ALWAYS KIND OF PART OF THE 121 BROADWAY DESIGN REVIEW AND APPROVAL SO AGAIN JUST REALLY QUICKLY BACK IN 2022 WE WE DID THIS IDC AMENDMENT TO WHICH NOT ONLY INCLUDED 121 BUT IT INCLUDED THERE WERE ELEMENTS OF THE SUBSTATION BUT THE 121 WAS KIND OF BROUGHT THROUGH AS A SPECIFIC ELEMENT THAT DESIGN THE THE AMENDMENT APPROVAL AND THE DESIGN REVIEW IN THE THIRD QUARTER OF 22 HAD THIS EAST WEST CONNECTOR AS PART OF THE MITIGATION. THAT INCLUDED A CHILDREN'S PLAY AREA. STEVE WILL SHOW THAT IN A MINUTE. AS WE GOT INTO THE CENTER PLAZA DESIGN INTO LAST YEAR, THE FEEDBACK WE GOT WAS THAT THE CHILDREN'S PARK WOULD BE A GREAT ELEMENT IN THE CENTER PLAZA. SO AS YOU JUST SAW, WE MOVED THE CHILDREN'S PARK INTO THE MAIN CENTER PLAZA. AND SO AS WE'VE KIND OF NOW PROGRESSED THE EAST-WEST CONNECTOR, WE'VE REIMAGINED THAT WITHOUT THE CHILDREN'S PLAY. AND GIVEN THAT WAS ALWAYS PART OF THE 121 DESIGN REVIEW PIECE, WE'RE JUST BRINGING THAT AS A SEPARATE DESIGN UPDATE. NOT ONLY BECAUSE IT WAS PART OF THAT DESIGN APPROVAL ORIGINALLY, BUT IT ALSO FROM A DELIVERY PERSPECTIVE IS ALWAYS TIED TO THE DELIVERY OF 121. SO YOU SEE AT THE END OF THE TIMELINE, WE'RE CURRENTLY PLANNING TO HAVE INITIAL OCCUPANCY OF 121 IN THE SECOND QUARTER OF 27 AND A FINAL OCCUPANCY IN THE THIRD QUARTER OF 27. AND SO THAT WOULD BE THE TIMING OF BRINGING THE EAST WEST CONNECTOR FORWARD WITH THE RESIDENTIAL BUILDING AND HENCE THE REASON WHY WE'RE SEPARATING OUT THE TWO BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO BE DELIVERED SEPARATELY. THE CENTER PLAZA IS GOING TO DELIVER AT THE COMPLETION OF THE SUBSTATION. SO THAT'S JUST THE REASON WHY I'M DOING THIS SEPARATELY. SO STEVE, WHY DON'T YOU JUST WALK THROUGH KIND OF WHERE WE WERE AND WHERE WE ARE NOW IN THE DESIGN.
SPEAKER_15	So the first slide here shows the history of where we were in the previous approval of the east-west connector. This is when the children's playground was in the location between 105 Broadway to the south and 115 Broadway on the north side. Of course, the east tier would be the 6th Street Connector and the Kitty Knox Bikeway and connecting further to the Volpe development, the east, and then to the west side across this crosswalk and the East Service There's some images here, some renderings of the play structures looked like before. Fairly similar to what's in the Center Plaza now with various climbing structures. One end focused on larger children, and then on the other end, smaller management of play structures and smaller hammock swing play stepping stones for the younger children on the other end of the play area. Next slide here. of surrounding conditions. The two to the left would be the Volpe development, and the bottom left one really shows, at least at the time, some concepts of what the 6th Street Connector would look like with the existing walkway and mature trees, and then some of the park spaces that would be developed to each side of that connector in the Volpe project. The bottom right, you can see end of this project and the top right so see that just a little plan showing where those are all located. Showing a little more context and zooming out here wanted to show what the location of the site is and the connection through to other developments. So I would point out this is the center plaza development boundary for the red outline here in the middle and then the east west connector of course north is the right now so These West connectors down here at the bottom of the screen. And you can see a dashed line tracing over with really the sort of bigger concept of the connecter, starting at Galileo Galilei Way at the western end, running between 145 Broadway and 125 Broadway, bringing you through to the West Service Drive. That portion is first built already as part of the 145 Broadway project. Then the orange dotted line will bring you through to the Center Plaza as the part of the future development of Center Plaza 121 Broadway. And then we'll continue in this portion of the Eastwood Connector We want to highlight a couple existing additions here. They'll get more into the design of the space. As I mentioned before, down north to the top and so to the west side is the connection across the East Service Drive to the Center Plaza and to the east on the right would be the Volpe project across the 6th Street Connector. There's also an existing bridge connection between 105 and 115 Broadway. Second floor bridge connections. There's, of course, access underneath that. There is the enclosed fence here for a biogen gas storage tank that would remain as is. It's also five mature trees here that will remain as is in this project. And dashed here in blue is approximate location of an underground stormwater detention system that serves 115 Broadway, which would also remain in this location. So some of those things do sort of control how we approach the design for this space. So you see just the same plan without those overlays on it showing. The idea here is we're continuing the crosswalk connection from the center plaza under the bridge connection and follow what's really the good thing alignment of that east-west connection path today to the north side of those trees. I don't know if you're familiar. On the south side of those trees has been the Turner construction trailers for several years. So really using the alignment of that crosswalk center plaza behind 1.1 Broadway shifting that alignment and then following the existing path width, which is about six feet today to the north of those existing trees. And then to the south side of those trees, we'll be creating a new seating area taking place, what was sort of the former Turner construction trailer site. We will be using different color papers, so to look at it in the center plaza to act on where the, the quieter seating areas are versus the circulation spaces, but matching the same idea of the precast concrete pavers that we're using in the Pentecost and also at 121 Broadway. Also a few bench seating areas here for some of the quiet seating space between the busier path to the east and west. And then some new trees replacing the trees that have not survived adjacent to 115 Broadway on the north side of that connection path. And a few other trees that we've planted for the intention that these are somewhat temporary depending on future developments in this area. So I didn't think it made sense to put these trees in the ground where they would potentially get difficult to relocate in the future. So I already mentioned The red paving on the west side here is the matching of the paving of Santa Plaza. The orange paving, as I said, it matches the design of the pavers in Santa Plaza, but it would be pervious paving to help promote aeration of the roots and not impact the trees too much in this area. So a little different from the paving in the plaza, which is all, of course, on structure above the substation. In this case, we're taking the opportunity to put in forest paving, a bit like they did with the forest, could not quite pass several years ago to pick the tree roots in that area. There is, I'll just mention two other connections here. The service connection to 115 Broadway. I think it's mechanical rooms here, electrical rooms. So we're maintaining the access to a few steps that go into those doorways, which would be just simply cast in place concrete paving. And you can also see some of the widths here. So we matched the nine foot width of the crosswalk. It shows a little differently graphically here, but For the planting, the general concepts that I mentioned, we've got the new, what we're calling shrubs in these planters here, because of the fact that we are so temporary, they would be woody shrubs, not really a tree, but something that would be a little small that could install in those planters. Maintaining those five mature trees as I mentioned, and then the new seven new trees on the north side of that path, all with the new ground cover planting and the understory of those trees. Next slide shows the detailed planting plan. um people are interested i can have kelly talk through some of the plants here or we can sort of go through and ask questions with the questions about planting um yeah i think we just keep going steve we can circle back with any questions okay and then lighting concept here is to remove the existing Pollard lighting, which is those gray X circles you see here and replace them with new pedestrian poles, a little more light level in this area and try to get more lighting for the bench seating than just simply the path lighting there today. And then also the sort of taller poles with spot lighting kind of coming down to avoid, you know, low level, more like cover a larger area, then we'll be able to just to lower like 12 foot pedestrian poles we'll be using along the path connection here. These pedestrian poles actually match the poles that have already been installed at the east-west connector behind 145 Broadway. And some renderings here to show what this would look like. This is standing basically below that pedestrian bridge from between 115 and 105 Broadway. You see the badge and screen wall where the tanks are located behind this. And if you're looking towards the east towards Bowlby, and this is the verse of the seating side of the path, the main connector path is against that screen wall on the left side of the image. You see 15105 Broadway side on the south side to the right here. And you can see some idea of the ground cover planting below the existing mature trees, some of the new trees against 115 Broadway. Next image is a little higher perspective, more bird's eye view, looking towards the west now, towards the center plaza. You can see that connector, second floor connector bridge. You've got to peek through under that bridge to see the center plaza connection that I mentioned before across that crosswalk, taking you towards 145 Broadway and the continuation of that connector. And again, some of the bench seating, the native ground cover planting, existing trees here visible. Lower down now, this is on the actual connector path, looking towards the west, towards the bottom, under that bridge, kind of coming from the 6th Street connector, entering this space. And the new trees on the right side of the image. And finally, just some ideas of what the benches might look like in this space. Probably have back benches, could have arms on these benches. And a wood bench with metal legs here. And the pavers I mentioned, imagine the trapezoidal pavers that were used in Fennel Plaza. The material palette is the colors we presented when we presented the original concept of the Fennel Plaza, the yellow books we called it. I think we used the same kind of material palette here. We would be using some planters I mentioned, like this metal planter, about four feet square, and then we have trash up set. coming through here. If any bikes are complicated knocks, we'd rather not have them biking through the speeding areas here. I think that's the last thought I have for this project.
Ted Cohen	Thanks, Steve. Turn it back to you, Mr. Chair.
SPEAKER_10	Thank you.
Ted Cohen	So I know CDC staff has been looking at this and working on this. Perhaps we could have comments from them before we go to the board's questions and comments. Eric, is there anything you would like to add right now?
SPEAKER_18	Sure. I could go either now or after the CD. Yeah, the CRA. I just probably don't have as extensive a list as they do. But I could do what I noticed.
SPEAKER_02	Go ahead. Uh-oh, you're fading out. Can you hear me?
Ted Cohen	You're intermittent. I don't know what's going on. Perhaps the CRA could start with its comments at this point. Sure.
SPEAKER_12	Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm actually gonna see if Cecilia Cobb is available to talk to it in more detail, but just a little, note about our process uh we through our ongoing design review process after schema act design is approved we have additional iterations in design process for both buildings and open space and so this is kind of in this middle zone of dd review that is typically more of an administrative process with staff and cdd participation but with the interest in the open space input and the playground area in particular we've been having additional meetings with our design review team. And that's I think been the foundation of a lot of our comments Cecilia you with us to follow up in more detail can't.
SPEAKER_01	Everyone able to hear me. Fantastic. First, I'd like to thank BXP and the design team for continuing to respond to the rounds of feedback that we've had throughout, frankly, the past number of years. I feel like we've done a lot of extensive work in the past year, especially. And we generally do feel as though the changes, modifications, first speaking to Center Plaza here, have moved closer to, I think, a more cohesive design overall, to a space that appears more attractive and welcoming, and also provides a different open space experience than what exists in the other corners of Kendall Square. I think with that being said sort of out front, we do definitely appreciate the changes that were made to the nooks and to the primary walking paths. We also especially appreciate the modifications that are done to the planting areas, both next to the hatch, sort of throughout the different nooks, and the increase in plantings near the trellis and swing area. ALSO APPRECIATE THE CHANGES MADE TO PROVIDE MORE ACCESSIBLE WALKWAYS TO GET BETWEEN THE VARIED GRADES THAT WE HAVE ACROSS THIS SITE AND ALL THE DIFFERENT SEATING AREAS THAT EXIST IN HERE. I BELIEVE AS MR. LONENBERG ALLUDED TO, PERHAPS THE AREA THAT STILL FEELS A BIT UNRESOLVED OR THAT I THINK WE ARE MOVING CLOSER TO RESOLUTION 4 IS THE CHILDREN'S PLAY AREA. Some of the primary comments that the CRA has had in the past is creating an iconic character for that area and to make it feel as though it really has its own identity and can be a draw for children, families alike. And I do think that the options that we've seen today get us a bit closer in that direction. I appreciate the increase of different play equipment, both in terms of some of the educational play panels, which provide a good amount of accessibility across the board. the ability to potentially link both of these themes to how electrical substations potentially impact birds or bees and how having one that's underground might provide a different narrative than what is typically seen as conflict sometimes between the sort of environmental elements that we have there and the need for an increase in energy and technology and infrastructure associated with that. I think I'll let Alex Levering step in as well and share if she has any other notes here. I'd say in general, we are definitely moving closer to something that provides that sort of iconic character combined with some of the elements that we've seen across the rest of the plaza.
SPEAKER_00	THANKS SO MUCH, CECILIA. I THINK THAT REALLY REFLECTED WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT IN THE STAFF MEMO. THE ONE ADDITIONAL THING I'LL SAY IS KIND OF WANTING TO REVIEW A FURNISHING PLANS TO SEEK WAYS TO ENSURE THAT THE 290 RETAIL CAN BE A THRIVING SPACE AND REALLY HELP TO ACTIVATE THE PLAZA. So I think that's it for CRA comments. Perhaps, Eric, you identified you wanted to speak after.
SPEAKER_18	Okay, yes, I agree with everything you raised. The design continues to improve and that's great. Specifically, sort of like you said, the play area is more interesting, has more of an identity. Either of the two options seem interesting, don't really have a preference. There's more vegetation, including TALLER, STILL SMALL, BUT TALLER TREES THAT SOUND LIKE, YOU KNOW, ARE FEASIBLE OVER THE SUBSTATION. THE GEOMETRY OF THE LAWN AND THE AREAS AROUND IT AND THE PATHS ALL SEEM A LOT NICER IN THIS VERSION, INCLUDING THAT SLIGHT BEND IN THE MAIN DIAGONAL PATH, I THINK REALLY KIND OF SPARKS UP THE WHOLE SCHEME. YOU'VE ADDRESSED HANDICAPPED ACCESS AND MOVEMENT AND THERE'S LESS PAVEMENT. So some suggestions, which also I think kind of fit together with the CRA's thoughts, continuing to improve the play area. I think still there could be more vegetation, more varied topography. Could it basically be something that you explore a little bit more? rather than sort of having it all laid out for you at one glance. Could it have a more complex interior side of its perimeter for one thing? On your slide 60, there's a kind of demarcation of the fall zones around all the structures, which makes a kind of curvilinear line on the inside of its kind of perimeter wall, which sort of creates a series of nooks around the play structures, seems kind of appealing. Let's see. Could there be more play equipment, more height, more equipment that's based on movement? And I was wondering about, you know, there's obviously the fall kind of perimeter or, you know, radius around structures. What if structures are combined? Like I'm thinking of that kind of agglomeration of three structures at Lincoln Park in Somerville. which is really quite wonderful. You know, the climb up one net thing and go across some bridges and down one slide or another slide that might help by combining, you know, not have to have so much separation between one thing and the next. What else? Oh, would it be... POSSIBLE OR IF YOU THOUGHT ABOUT INCLUDING SORT OF ADULT RECREATION OR EXERCISE EQUIPMENT THROUGHOUT, YOU KNOW, WITH THE IDEA OF PLAY FOR ALL AGES. COULD THERE BE MORE VEGETATION THROUGHOUT INCLUDING PLANTS AND CONTAINERS, FOR INSTANCE, ON TOP OF THE HATCH? know if you need to move to open the hatch you're certainly going to have a crane there anyway um and um more more benches i think there's some more bench opportunities like in that diagonal path that's on the south side of the hatch that's between in other words between the hatch and that in the kind of five-sided lawn um what else um Yeah. Could the area between, Alex talked about this, the area between 290 and the exhaust tower, could that be sort of more inviting somehow? There's a perspective looking from the west side. It just looks... Could it be something kind of intriguing that you want to kind of find out what's in there? So those are sort of comments that maybe are new to this. I could go through older comments that I think still could be thought about at this point. For instance, could there be on the west side of the west drive, could there be trees, more trees behind where that drop-off area is? You know, just extend that band of double-wide trees, extend it as a single line of trees, just to kind of add more vegetation to the area. You know, the old, could there be trees in containers elsewhere, like on the sidewalks along the east and west side? um clearly they wouldn't be big but it might be better than than none um vines on the trellises um and let's see um oh would it be possible to chamfer the southeast corner of the beacon so that it doesn't kind of intrude into the the zone of that path that runs past it So that is what I had for the plaza. A few comments on the connector. Also, yeah, it seems improved since we saw it. It would be good, I think, to think about both ends of the connector. How do they connect to what they're connecting to? Where's the center line of that path compared to the crosswalk on the west end? But more importantly, how does it relate to the kind of alignment of paths coming from Volpe and crossing the Sixth Street walkway would it be worth considering extending the scope out to the sixth street walkway or maybe coordinating at least with the city on exactly how you know south of that i mean east of that red dotted line how do you really make a smooth connection um could there be a few additional trees uh for instance at the northwest corner on the other side of the bridge or maybe on the south side where the underground water storage isn't. And just a question about the furniture and benches and trash containers and so on. Are they the same as will be used elsewhere? You know, maybe they are, but it would make sense to coordinate with the VASA and maybe coordinate with whatever's going on in the Volpe Center. So that's what I had. Thanks.
Ted Cohen	Well, thank you. And planning board members now, any questions or comments? I know Ashley and Mary, you've both been working on this, if you want to add some things now. Dan's got his hand up, so why don't we start with Dan?
Dan Anderson	Well, I was actually going to follow you, Mr. Chair. Since Ashley and Mary were there, I was looking for their comments, so I'll reserve mine for a moment.
Ted Cohen	Okay, Mary?
Mary Lydecker	Oh, I was going to go the opposite. I feel like we've said a lot, but I will follow up. I think as the applicant described, play was one of the biggest areas of comment. And so I appreciate your team going back and coming up with two different options for the site. And I think for the rest of planning board, Following a first review, the Sasaki team had gone back and kind of went with more of a pollinator garden, but all of the equipment looked quite what I would describe as almost precious, right, in the context of these very large infrastructure elements. And I would weigh that I still look at the play very much in the context of the intake and the exhaust. It should be, to me, sculptural and you know, it's going to be dwarfed, but it's going to be read in the context of these very large sculptural elements. And so saying that in terms of play massing, if you will, I will say that I would lean, you know, if I just had these two options towards the bird version versus the bee, which is kind of twofold. One is I think the elements hold up to the scale of the intake exhaust better. But it also, I think both of them will be at risk of becoming a little bit too somatic. You know, the little pieces that are, say, decorating the fence, I think there's just kind of a risk that sometimes when you grab onto a theme, especially one that's not actually inherent to this place, it feels like it doesn't hold up to the big structures that are in this. So saying that, I think the Earthscape Taller Towers are massing-wise where I would head. And I say that because I still feel like they read still as a bit rustic. And part of that is just the nature of the Earthscape timber robinia products, which we see in other playgrounds in Cambridge. So I think we talked about this again is keep in mind, this will be within this kind of broader Cambridge playground ecology. So like look at those others and make sure that this one feels unique. And even those sometimes will come in more metal or have a little bit more of a tech vibe to them. So there's something about both the bees and birds that still strike me as random as a theme. And I love the idea. I think I saw this in the CDD memo of, say you had educational panels, somewhere it should you know, tell kids in an interpretive way and adults what's up with the substation down below. And so I wish the play would pull from that, right, and worry a little bit less about the literal need for something. So if you look at, say, other playgrounds nationally, like, say, Domino Park in New York, it's built on the Domino sugar refinery. It has these towers and things. And you don't really learn about sugar, but it feels like it's thematically kind of pulled. It's sculptural. It's artistic. It's colorful, poppy. And so I would just urge... I don't think that I'm looking for a theme as much as something that is visually compelling and stands up to what is basically architecture as art, which are these. really impressive structures and also lean on what's so cool down below, right? The substation. So I would hope that maybe that could inspire a little bit. And in terms of local precedents, the Peabody School Playground just got redone and it's very much has these taller structures like what you're showing, but they're in metals and vinyl, you know, like netting. They're a little bit more tech oriented. look and feel, if you will. So maybe take a look at that one. I also was intrigued by Eric's comment about right now the play area feels like a space got carved out and now you're putting the pieces. And I was curious by what Eric talked about. Well, what if the edges, when you take the fall zone, actually modulate based on that to create the kind of nooks and corners that kids love to find? And in addition to the boards, On the side, there are always also musical elements. I know Gorick has a lot of great ones. There are some good ones from theirs in the inclusive playground over at Danahy. So remember that even those little spaces that are outside the fall zone but not against the wall could also be something other.
	So
Mary Lydecker	As everyone can tell, I feel like we got quite into the play last time. I'll reiterate what others said that the cant to the walk, I think was an improvement. And certainly I think the way that the plan has leaned more green. So I feel like you guys have been able to shave down the hardscape where it's not needed to get it as green as possible and getting those small trees in, I think will do a lot. to advance um this not feeling barren obviously we all wish there were trees on this and so i feel like we i really appreciate that you're doing as much as possible to get there the last thing i'll say on the center plaza is um maybe because i've thought so much now about the play and the nooks and all those areas i'm still kind of wondering in my head what the deck will feel like um and so that's something maybe i'm interested in what my other colleagues will we'll talk and think about. But then switching to the east-west connector, this is the first time we saw this. We have not reviewed this before. A couple questions or thoughts I had was, I suppose I'm wondering since there's so much hardness with the streets in the area, Does it need as much pathway and seating in this area? I think I'm just intrigued by getting more softscape in an area with so much hardscape. Understanding that this is intended maybe to be a little bit quieter place for respite. And so I could understand if there's a real need for this, especially between the Volpe and this site. And then my other comment on that I think echoes Eric's is I'm kind of curious if the benches, the site furnishings will be what's in the center plaza, have some coherence between those. So they feel linked. And I guess I'll change that to I would hope that maybe that is the case, that they feel like they're connected in that way. Certainly the geometry of the pathway feels like it's asking for the same kind of special bench treatment that you've got going in the center. And so if that is the case, maybe keep exploring that. And then my last comment is on the planting. And I would say when I looked at the palette, it looks a little bit heavy on perennial, a little bit light on woody shrubs. And so I worry a little bit about how it will look in the winter. Everything's also quite low, more in like the 18 inch to 24 range and wondering if there isn't a place for either slightly taller or a little bit more massing for some woody shrubs and also encouraging all your your renderings are saying they're native but a fair number of them are not the the Chinese witch hazel the barrenwort and both of the Hakonechloa and that's a lot of the specimens. So I think native and adapted is totally fine, but I feel like you kind of want to make a choice. In the last meeting, the Sasaki group brought their ecologist who was helping with the plantings in the center plaza. which the palette had really developed to reflect that they're very different conditions. There's shade, there's sun. It's also gonna be really harsh, so I would suggest that maybe they're also looking at the corridor connector to see if any of the kind of, if you're really leaning native in the center, maybe you're able to pull that, knowing that it's very shady, so you're gonna be more limited in your options. Okay. So those are my comments.
Ted Cohen	Thank you. I apologize. I'm getting occasional message that my internet is unstable, but it seems to be coming and going.
SPEAKER_17	I was just going to, Mo, if you can maybe just pull the slide up that had the two playground options side by side, it may be, I'm sensing we're going to get feedback on that and it may just be helpful to have a reference of some. Thank you.
Ted Cohen	Great. Thank you. Ash.
Ashley Tan	Thank you, Ted. I just want to start off saying thank you for the team's efforts and, you know, trying to accommodate and think about how to make this place both more interesting but also accommodate the fact that there is, you know, a huge substation underneath. And it's been great to see there are improvements on trying to increase, you know, the height of things, whether it's through taller plantings or planters. I know there is, you know, even though we want trees, there's can't work on this space and um you know there's like bald staff to be open then there's the exhaust and intake and um so so i do like the ideas of the educational signage and i think someone on the cra board recommended it last time and you know I was thinking of this place a little more in the context of Greater Kendall Square the other day which soon or afterwards Volpe site will have another big park open space area and not too far from here there's also Toomey Park which is probably larger in scale and so there are other you know open space areas and I think what makes this space unique and you kind of can't hide is that there is a huge exhaust, a huge intake. And so what can we do to not just hide it, but also embrace it a bit. And so the ideas of, you know, the educational assignage, the murals on, I can't remember which building it was, I think would be great and a lot of fun. And to that point, I think, what Mary is trying to explain earlier about just the scale of the play area is important. And I frankly also don't have much of an opinion on, you know, the bird nest sort of beehive, but as long as there's a scale that, you know, it isn't just lost in this area, I think would be important. And, you know, Yeah, and then, so on the connector, I think this is more of a question. There is, I think one of the panelists briefly touched upon it earlier in the presentation, but I couldn't hear too clearly, which is, you know, what is anticipated bike traffic, if there is any, and what can be done about it? Because I know it's connected to a bike path on one side. How can we accommodate that? Expecting that there will be bikers that are coming through and is it going to be safe for the pedestrians? And so I was just curious as if there are any thoughts about that.
SPEAKER_05	Thank you.
SPEAKER_11	Thank you, Ted. Can you hear her? I see Daniel's hand up so I can look at him.
Ted Cohen	I'm sorry, I'm getting the internet issue again. Dan, can you hear me?
Dan Anderson	I can, Ted. I'm happy to give a couple of comments. Great, thank you. Just in context as well, I saw this project for the first time back in December 10. I think it's going to be fantastic. There's always the danger of too many cooks in the kitchen, so please take my comments for what they're worth, but I will try not to repeat too many of the things that were thrown out here, but there did seem to be a few that were worth noting. The path and its reconfiguration and nooks are a great improvement. I know one of the comments that I had was around the beacon, and I really appreciate seeing that planted up against and engaged more. I still think that there's some detail, as maybe Eric mentioned, about that end corner and how it engages the pavement and planting. So from a pedestrian experience, how that planting engages with that is just a kind of final detail. i'll come back to it, but for for both schemes, I really think lighting becomes really critical, so I appreciated seeing it on the connector, and so I still have some questions about. It's maybe being handled here for the plaza. I think that Mary's comments about scale here and kind of visibility goes to this sort of middle scale that we've got the larger structures. And I think there's an opportunity for something that the play area might be able to handle. I don't know whether something sculptural, like a very large sculptural tree that birds and bees both love, but something that's got height and volume and motion would be particularly wonderful here. I also really agree with Eric's feeling about the edges of the play area. I think more undulation, more revealing different spaces within it. It does feel kind of like a corral with stuff stuck in there still at the moment. And I think that if there was an opportunity for play structures to span between two areas that had some more differentiation, I think that that could be a piece. The other thing really is really palette. I was struck by the earlier play structure, play area at the East-West connector, which had very striking blues and whites. And these both schemes, the bird's nest and the beehive feel very muted and very much similar in color and texture to the rest of the plaza. And I think that from my subjective opinion, a kind of blue or something more vibrant in color could benefit this. But it certainly supports some more trees where possible. I think Eric pointed out a few places where that might be possible. I don't think I have, well, I think on the east-west connector, two very minor pieces. One, a question as to whether lighting might be integrated underneath the benches, lower level lighting, more pedestrian level, and whether those benches could be pushed back just a little bit. There's always something a little uncomfortable that have your feet in the path as opposed to just set back 18 inches farther from the path, really to make it feel a little bit more comfortable. And then I also did see that there was a 50% set that kind of had two paths and maybe the angled cut through didn't have it sort of broke up the existing trees instead of four and one, it was three and two. and that potentially gives more area for planting along 6th Street. Just as a thought, that might help provide maybe some room for one additional tree. I think it is overlapping the stormwater detention. I think that's really it. I think this is going to be a fantastic space. I think that really honing in on the details here is really what is going to continue to make a difference. So I really applaud the breadth of teams. Really, this is pulling together from both an urban design, a landscape, an architectural perspective. So I applaud BXP and the team for the work that they've done so far. So thank you.
Ted Cohen	Thank you.
SPEAKER_18	Eric? You just reminded me of another thought. Looking at both these drawings, couldn't you put some of those sort of medium, sort of low-height trees that you that are being proposed at the northern end, you know, the pointed end of the play area. Couldn't those also be in that zone between the play area and the east drive? You know, it looks like about four feet wide. You know, surely there's enough quantity of soil there to support them. You know, and these are sort of open spindly trees, you know, like the striped maple and so on. I think seeing through the kind of stems of those into the play would be really quite wonderful. It would give it a little bit more of a scale, you know, that Mary was talking about also. I really agree with all her comments, too, about sort of character thematicism versus, I guess, less thematicism but more sort of scale. So thanks.
Ted Cohen	Carolyn, Joy, do you have any comments you want to add at this point?
Carolyn Zern	This is Carolyn. I'll just jump in quickly to say that really, This is all new to me. I really appreciate the work that the proponent and the consultant team and the CRA planning board design consulting teams have put into this. I was going to get to kind of a similar place that Mary got to in terms of the preference for the bird's nest, just because, well, maybe this is the same reason. I was going to say it was a different reason. The beehive theme feels a little bit too literal. The bird's nest allows for a little bit more interpretation and imagination. so i and and i think she's absolutely right about the structure and the playing off of the intake or the um structure plan left there um i forget whether that's the intake or the exhaust but um and on the educational panels i think including education about the substation is a great idea and i was going to my original comment on the panels was going to be kind of more graphics less narrative to allow for kind of storytelling and imagination and language development from the kids but i do think that might be tricky with the substation. So but in an inclusion of sensory panels around and undulating and I think I comments that have been put out before me have been really wonderful.
Ted Cohen	So I'll stop. Joy, do you want to add anything?
Joy Jackson	I guess I would echo a few comments that were made. I agree. I don't remember who brought it up initially, but the point about integrating some of the broader substation context, I think, makes a lot of sense. And I just work in energy, so I think that would be cool from my subjective point of view. But I also, I think Dan's comments around integrating color into the play area also resonated with me. That was something that I kind of made a similar connection in looking at that. I think the East West connector, that original rendering of the play area with the blues, I feel like it could be, you know, worth potentially exploring some alternatives. kind of color schemes in the play area. But I think the comments of the rest of the folks on the planning board have been very thorough. So I'm in alignment with what's been discussed so far.
Ted Cohen	Right. Dan, you have another comment?
Dan Anderson	Actually a question because it maybe has to do with the color blue, but was there any thought from the design team about integrating a water park or kind of water elements in here. Obviously, you know, things are seasonal, but obviously that's got sound, tactility, maybe doesn't mix well with electricity, but that's a different issue. But just as a question whether that was bandied about, thought about as a possibility. I can jump in if it's okay just to answer that, Mr. Chair.
SPEAKER_17	Please. Yeah, so one, there were a lot of constraints going back to the original approval on what can be done. Eversource obviously had a lot of feedback on there. So we're not allowed to do trees on top of the substation. We're not allowed to do water. But there is a water feature as part of the public plaza on 121 Broadway. So there will be a water feature As part of the project, and that was part of the original approval, but there are there are you know, a number of constraints, obviously, with. The substation being below the plus.
Ted Cohen	Well, I will just throw in my comments that I appreciate all the work that's been done by the proponent and CRA and the design team. I think things have improved dramatically. I don't know if anybody's hearing me now. We can hear you. Okay, good. And I, you know, would echo the comments of all that my colleagues have made. I think they've all got great ideas. My one comment, real comment, is it still seems to me there's an awful lot of hardscape in the plaza and that it would be great if some of it could be eliminated and gets even just grass, I think would be better. And if I had to vote, I would vote for the bird's nest scheme rather than the beehive. in part, I think, because the big climbing structure sort of echoes the intake and exhaust structures, and it seems to me that that would lead into questions about what's going on underground and possibly the panels that might be listed for the kids and the really terrifically. And, you know, I look forward to, you know, what comes next. So if there are no further questions or comments from the board, Conrad, you have a question or comment?
SPEAKER_11	Thank you, Ted. I just wanted to provide the Redevelopment Authority Board with any updated comments or questions that they had based on these presentations. And I have a couple myself, but I'd like for them to go first if there are any. Velo, Joe, Kathy, Aviva.
SPEAKER_16	All set, Conrad. Why don't you go?
SPEAKER_11	Okay. All right. You know, I don't think that I disagree with anything that was said by members of the planning board. I'd like to sort of pull out the sort of the mention of the interpretation for the substation use and to make that a little bit more transparent to the people in the park. I know that staff comment from the CRA mentioned that in the staff memo. And I will say that the Museum of Science in their discovery room does have some sort of electric circuitry accessibility, well, accessible electric circuitry activities that might be interesting to take a look at as participatory science type of activity. I also, speaking to Dan's comment about water, just want to mention that I believe the 6th Street Canal, Broad Canal, used to come through this very area. And as part of the east-west connector discussion a little while ago, I remember mentioning that it could be interesting to just remind people that that was a previous condition and to sort of tell the story of the landscape, understanding that, you know, we got a lot of cooks here in the kitchen and it's important to be consistent with your themes across different design treatments. So don't take that too seriously. Just a comment and not anything that I'm hanging my hat on. And Getting into the sort of overall layout and the sort of the inundations and the sort of the the the grading of the landscape. I do feel that the. endorsing a reveal strategy or an exploratory strategy inside this pretty limited space is a good goal to have. And I really appreciate what the design team has done here to sort of present some themes. I also recall saying something about this being a habitat, even though it is in the middle of a commercial district. And I think that may have been taken to heart. And I really appreciate and thank you for doing that. but um I I do understand the sort of the the risk of being too literal with with some of those suggestions so um I could pull back on that comment just a little bit And just the last piece, again, sort of keeping with consistency materials, this may not be possible because of constraints of the site, but thinking about the intersection of the Kitty Knox bike path and the east west connector um wondering if you could differentiate those paths by using a stone dust on one side to basically suggest that people either slow down or stick around a little bit more and the other the other side is for people to just keep on moving to the next step or to the next little chamber up on either side of the connector so um those are those are a couple of my comments uh but overall i'm very pleased with these updates um and and even if it were to be sort of taken in the hole um i wouldn't i wouldn't be upset with this moving forward and um my internal design review committee um just as a last comment from my nine-year-old who stuck her head into this meeting and looked at the bird's nest and the beehive um first want to know if we could go there is it open yet to the beehive. And when I clarified that it wasn't open yet, which one would you like? She had a hard time picking. And so I really sort of think that the beehive's climbing structure is compelling and the bird's nest's theme is compelling. So just some feedback from a current user of Cambridge's playgrounds and the Lincoln Playground over in Argenziano Park as well.
Ted Cohen	Great, thank you. So if planning board members have no further questions or comments, then we would need a motion to conclude this design update. Again, Joy and Dan need to be appointed to vote on this. Could I have a motion to conclude the design update from someone?
Dan Anderson	I'm happy to move that.
Ted Cohen	Who was that? Dan? That was Dan. Dan? And is there a second?
SPEAKER_05	This is Carolyn.
Carolyn Zern	Go ahead. You've got both Carolyn and Mary willing to second that, Ted, if you're still there.
SPEAKER_02	He's yours.
Ted Cohen	Jeff, could we have a roll call vote on the motion to conclude?
SPEAKER_14	Who did you recognize seconding that, just so I can write in my notes? Mary. Okay, Mary Lydecker. Okay, so on that motion, Mary Lydecker?
SPEAKER_05	Yes.
SPEAKER_14	Ashley Tan?
SPEAKER_05	Yes.
SPEAKER_14	Carolyn Zern?
SPEAKER_05	Yes.
SPEAKER_14	Dan Anderson? Yes. Joy Jackson?
SPEAKER_05	Yes.
SPEAKER_14	Ted Cohen yes okay that's all all six members including the associate members appointed on this case voting in favor
Ted Cohen	Great. Well, to the proponents, thank you very much for bringing this all before us. And we look forward to seeing what develops. The planning board has one more matter to deal with. I don't know if the CRA board needs to take any further action and or if you wish to adjourn your meeting.
SPEAKER_11	Tom, I don't think we need to take any further action. I would be open to a motion to adjourn this joint meeting of the planning board and the CRA board. Do I have a maker of the motion to adjourn?
Mary Lydecker	So moved.
SPEAKER_11	Thank you, Kathy. We'll be taking a roll call since this is hybrid meeting.
SPEAKER_12	On the motion to adjourn, Kathy Bourne.
SPEAKER_14	Yes.
SPEAKER_12	Kathy, yes. Joe Camillus?
SPEAKER_10	Yes.
SPEAKER_12	Joe, yes. Philo Castori? Yes. Bill, yes. Conrad Crawford? Yes. And Aviva Rothman-Short, sorry.
Joy Jackson	Yes.
SPEAKER_12	Aviva, yes. All right. Thank you, everyone. We'll continue.
Ted Cohen	Thank you, CRA members. It's always a pleasure to have joint meetings with you. Likewise. Thank you, Ted and team.
SPEAKER_11	Goodbye.
Ted Cohen	So Planning Board, we have one more item, which is a request for an extension of time for hearing and decision on Planning Board case PB315, an application for major amendment to modify the IDCP for the NMXD zoning district by Boston Properties Limited Partnership. And Jeff, are you giving us a update on this?
SPEAKER_14	I will. Jeff Roberts again with CDD. So those of you who are on top of things will remember that what we were hearing tonight is not the only pending request for the infill development concept plan under Planning Board Case 315. There is also a pending major amendment application, which has to do with shifting some of the land use on uh within the site um among different sites in the development plan so uh staff and this was a case that was heard on march 25th of this year the applicant is continuing to work on comments and feedback received by the planning board and and the cra board the last time this was discussed And let's see, in June, the planning board granted an extension until September, and the applicant has currently requested an additional extension to December 31st, 2025. So that's sort of leaving the case open for decision and filing before the end of this year. I'm happy to answer any general questions about that. And I believe in all of the representative, the applicant, or at least a representative, the applicant is still with us in case you have any questions for them.
Ted Cohen	Board members, does anybody have any questions? None appearing then. Could I have, well, again, we have to appoint Joy and Dan to vote on this matter. And could I have a motion to agree to the extension of time till December 31st, 2025?
Carolyn Zern	This is Carolyn, so moved.
Ted Cohen	And second?
Carolyn Zern	Ashley second.
Ted Cohen	Ashley second. Jeff, could we have a roll call vote?
SPEAKER_14	Yes, on that motion, Mary Lightacre?
SPEAKER_05	Yes.
SPEAKER_14	Ashley Tan. Yeah. Carolyn Zern.
SPEAKER_05	Yes.
SPEAKER_14	Dan Anderson. Yes. Joy Jackson.
SPEAKER_05	Yeah.
SPEAKER_14	Ted Cohen. Yes. That's all six members present voting in favor.
Ted Cohen	Well, that concludes the business of our agenda. Are there any additional comments from staff?
SPEAKER_14	Just a note that I think we'll have a good break for the rest of August and we'll pick back up in September and stay tuned in case there's any general business items between now and the next public hearing.
Ted Cohen	Okay, thank you. Any board members who have any questions or anything to add before we adjourn?
Dan Anderson	No, thank you for chairing tonight, Ted.
Ted Cohen	None appearing. Well, then, thank you. The meeting is adjourned. Have a good rest of the summer. Take care, everyone.