Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Tom, we are all set with the recording and the live streaming, so we should be able to open the meeting at 6.30 itself.

Okay. Good evening. Welcome to the November 18th, 2025 meeting of the Cambridge Planning Board. My name is Tom Cinevich and I am the vice chair and acting chair for this evening's meeting. Pursuant to Chapter 2 of the Acts of 2025 adopted by the 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 made of these proceedings. I will start by asking staff to take board member attendance and verify that all members are audible.

Thank you, Tom. This is Jeff Roberts at CDD. H. Theodore Cohen, are you present and is the meeting visible and audible to you? Present, visible and audible. Thank you, Ted. Mary Leydecker, are you present and is the meeting visible and audible to you?

Present, visible, and audible.

Thank you, Mary. Diego Macias, are you present and is the meeting visible and audible to you? Present, visible, and audible. Thank you, Diego. Ashley Tan, are you present and is the meeting visible and audible to you?

Present, visible, and audible.

Thank you, Ashley. Carolyn Zern, are you present and is the meeting visible and audible to you?

Present, visible, and audible.

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?

Hi, Jeff, visible and audible.

Thank you, Dan. Joey Jackson, are you present? And is the meeting visible and audible to you? Joy is absent. And Thompson Avish, can you confirm that the meeting is visible and audible to you?

Visible and audible.

Thank you, Tom. So that means we have seven planning board members. I'm sorry. Wrong column. Six planning board members present and one associate member.

Thank you very much, Jeff. The first order of business this evening is a discussion of a litigation strategy related to with respect to the matter known as the October 2nd, 2025 open meeting law complaint by Mr. Young Kim against the board, which is to be discussed in executive session. The board will reconvene in open session following this executive session. Is there a motion to move to an executive session for the purposes of discussing charges brought against the planning board with respect to the October 2 2025 open meeting law complaint by young Kim against the board? Please say your name.

This is Carolyn moved.

Carolyn moves second.

Second.

Thank you, Ted. With that, we'll move to executive session briefly.

I think we may need to vote on that motion.

Thank you, Jeff.

So on that motion, Ted Cohen? Yes. Mary Leidecker?

Yes.

Diego Macias? Yes. Ashley Tan? Yes. Carolyn Zurn?

Yes.

And Thompson-Avish. Yes. That's all members present voting in favor.

All right, we'll move to executive session. We'll be back as soon as we're done. Thank you.

Sophie.

Yes, Diego.

Am I supposed to join the other meeting? Yes.

Yes. You need to exit this one and join the other one because you can be only in one Zoom meeting on the same equipment.

Okay. It was leaving me just hanging. Is that okay? It'll admit me?

You should be able to. All right.

Should I try again?

Yes, please do.

I think I had the same problem getting into the executive session.

Okay. You know what? Let me try opening through my phone just so that.

Sarah Barkan is also having trouble joining as a panelist. The link that was sent out didn't work for her.

But that's for this meeting, right? Okay. Ray and Diego, can you try joining the other one now?

Yes, I'll try.

Eleni, just quickly wanted to check about one of your panelists who was having trouble joining the regular planning board meeting. Can you give me the name again so they can resend the panelist invitation?

Yes, so Sarah is on now, but I think she was on her phone because she can't join by her computer, but her email address is sbarchan at homeownersrehab.org.

I think that is what I have. Yeah, sbarchan at homeownersrehab.org. Okay, I'm going to resend. Hopefully that should work. Great, thank you. We should have that email by now. Did that work, Sarah? I think so. Thank you. Sure.

It appears that we've all made it back out of cyberspace back to this next hearing. So I'm looking for a motion again from the board to move out of executive session and resume the meeting.

This is Carolyn, so moved.

Carolyn, thank you. And a second on that motion?

Ashley, second.

Ashley, thank you very much. A roll call vote on that, Jeff. Thank you.

On that motion, Ted Cohen? Yes. Mary Lidecker?

Yes.

Diego Macias? Yes. Ashley Tan?

Yes.

Carolyn Zurn?

Yes.

And Thompson Avich? Yes. That's all members present voting in favor.

Thank you, Jeff. The next item is an update from the Community Development Department. Please introduce staff that are present, Jeff.

Great. Jeff Roberts, Director of Zoning and Development. I'll run the update with me from my team in Zoning and Development and the Community Development Department, Swathi Joseph and Evans Petrini. Also, we have from the Community Planning and Design Division, Eric Thorkelson and Brian Gregory. And we have from the City's Housing Department, and maybe they could get the video on, Cassie Arnaud and Janet Haynes. So that is the crew that we have with us tonight. I think I forgot someone the last time, so I'm just double checking. Yep, that's everybody. So just a quick schedule update for everyone. We only have one item of business tonight, which we'll get right to after the update. We don't have meetings scheduled for the next two weeks. So happy Thanksgiving. We expect to return on December 9th. And at this point, we have one item of general business scheduled on December 9th. This will be a planning board advisory consultation. It's not the first planning board advisory consultation because we've been doing this process for affordable housing overlay developments, but this will be the first case uh for a non-affordable housing overlay development and it's for a uh a residential proposal at 16 to 28 porter street um and that's coming under the um the planning board advisory consultation process as it was set up during the uh multi-family housing zoning amendments So that's December 9th. We could have more items. So for people in attendance, stay tuned to the website for that. And we expect we may have a meeting on December 16th, but we don't have any items confirmed yet. So again, look out for that. We hope that would be the last meeting of 2025. So we wouldn't have meetings on December 23rd or 30th. Don't quote me on that, but that's that's our expectation at this point. And only one just one other update. The ordinance committee held its hearing on. last Thursday on the Massachusetts Avenue and Cambridge Street zoning petitions. And that session concluded with the ordinance committee recessing the meeting to discuss further. And that further discussion will happen on December 2nd. So for those of you following that zoning process, December 2nd will be coming back to the ordinance committee.

and that's all i have for updates i'll turn it back to the chair thank you jeff are there questions for jeff from any of the planning board members seeing none uh we'll move to agenda item number one the next item on the agenda is the second of two required advisory design consultations of case number a h o dash eight an affordable housing overlay project proposed by hri at 30 Wendell LLC to construct a new eight-story building to create 95 affordable rental units and amenities and 77 long-term and eight short-term bicycle parking spaces with a gross floor area of 110,803 square feet at 28 through 30 Wendell Street. We will begin with CDD staff explaining why this is before us. Then we will have a presentation from the developer followed by public comment. And then the board will ask questions and finally discuss the proposed design. Evan.

Thank you. As you just mentioned, this is the second of two required planning board advisory consultation sessions for this project. And as a reminder, the AHO creates an alternative set of development standards that apply as of right for housing developments in which all units are made permanently affordable. The purpose of this design review is not for the planning board to grant or deny a permit. but to provide advisory comments on the design and its overall conformance with the city's urban design objectives and guidelines, which are summarized in the CDD memo. The planning board reviewed this proposal on August 5th of this year and issued a preliminary report on August 25th that was sent to the developer. The developers submitted a set of updated plans and CDD's zoning and urban design teams have provided reports to the board. And staff members are present to answer any questions tonight. Tonight, the board will review the updated proposal and decide what comments to include in a final report. Great.

Thank you. Thank you, Evan, for laying out our task. The presenter tonight is Ellie MacBrakus. So welcome. You will have 30 minutes for your presentation, but we hope you can be as concise as possible as usual. So please introduce your project team and yourself and begin. Thank you.

Hi, Tom. Thanks so much. I will be presenting the introduction and then we'll be passing it over to our design, our architect. Good evening, members of the board, city staff and folks joining from the public. My name is Eleni Makrakis and I will be presenting HRI's 2830 Wendell project for the second AHO design review alongside Gabby Aitchison from Icon Architecture. We are excited to be here and show you the updates we have made to the building and site design based on the comments we received in our August meeting. At the risk of repeating information, I want to make sure to provide some project context for anyone joining for the first time. Quick re-intros, HRI is a Cambridge-based nonprofit that owns about 1,500 rental apartments here in Cambridge, and Icon Architecture is a leader in multifamily rental energy efficiency design. HRI and Icon have worked on numerous projects together in Cambridge. Our goals for the project haven't changed. They are affordability, streetscape activation, and sustainability. And just like our goals, our unit mix has not changed. We are proposing an intergenerational multifamily rental building consisting of 95 apartment homes for low and moderate income households. 40 of the homes will be age-restricted one bedrooms and the balance will be predominantly two and three bedroom homes. Since August, we have worked hard to incorporate the feedback we heard from the community, city staff and the planning board members. We organized in-person material review for city staff and planning board members. We attended several meetings with urban design zoning and housing staff and submitted our Article 22 compliance materials. We've continued to advance the building and site design and are looking forward to showing you the updates we have made. I'll now hand it over to Gabby to walk you through those design updates.

Thanks, Eleni. As the architect for the project, I will share the current building and site design. The exterior design for 2830 Wendell has evolved over the course of multiple community meetings and an ongoing dialogue with the city, as Eleni just mentioned through the timeline. These images are a snapshot displaying milestones in that process. So even between the August planning board meeting and today, we've continued to improve the design and look forward to sharing the changes. The large elevation here closer look at the current design we're going to explain each element that's changed, but together they help refine the main volume by breaking down its massing and reinforcing vertical elements and the ground floor at Wendell street has been reorganized for clarity of distinct zones. More specifically, a two-foot reveal was added at the central mass to help break up that length of facade and reinforce the six-story datum. That edge now aligns with the vestibule, which was shifted to the east to give more space to the entry and was further enhanced by eliminating the canopy posts through cantilevering that structure. The little library was reconfigured with more geometric organization and play for colors. The relationship between the top of the windows and upper cornice at the eighth floor, as well as the cornice profiles have been updated and differentiated at the eighth and sixth floors. And the brick lintel heights and some window sizes have been changed to help with the proportions and overall impact of the windows. So most of the updates have been made on Wendell Street itself. We'll have a series of elevations that compare the last version with today's versions to help illustrate the changes. So as I noted, we did add more windows, increased sizes where we could as much as possible at the residential areas, while still remaining in a range that makes sense for a past house building. Conversely, at the ground floor, the ground floor glazing that was reduced in size and number due to the city feedback. So that feels more residential and that's less light pollution at the street level. We're going to continue to refine how that aligns best with the landscaping, look at the spacing more closely and where fenestration could be combined. That central reveal adds a shadow line and depth to the facade, as well as reinforcing the vertical rhythm between the windows and that's highlighted in the adjacent trim of the same color. The little library is intended to read as a cohesive element, but we're still working on how to integrate local history and artists into that design. HRI has connected with the Historical Commission and the Baldwin Community Center. and we'll continue these conversations as the project advances. On the side elevations, most of the updates were based on the unit layouts and reorganizing windows with the exception of the siding at the top two floors, which shift to a lighter color as it nears the corner base, which helped transition to the rear of the building. Refinements at the rear of the building include increasing and aligning the windows. That's, again, with coordination of the unit layouts. The bays are really necessary for the layout of the units. The design team is open to discussing the color for those. We like them to be distinct, but they don't necessarily need to be as dark. We have accents between windows to help lighten them. And that color also links it to the main body of the building. But the base could also remain as one color. The varied textures and colors of the exterior cladding are outlined here with the goal of having complementary colors that also create contrast and add depth to the facade. The only thing that's changed from the last planning board meeting to this one is the color of the base, which shifted from a slate color to the charcoal that's shown here. We found it worked better with the main body color, which does have a green undertone. Like Eleni mentioned, after hearing interest in seeing the actual material samples at the August meeting, HRI offered in person review of the materials for city staff and planning board members to see how the colors and textures worked in both the shade and the sun, and these pictures are examples of how that works in both lighting conditions. In addition to adding the increasing glazing, as I had mentioned, we also increased the lintel size by 50% on the brick facades. Along with the stacked brick effect that we have adjacent to the windows, it really helps increase the effect of the windows across the facade. The main entry canopy was refined to maintain its distinguished nature, but without as much depth to make the front court more flexible. The intention is to use composite metal panel as a material, but it will also make it more distinct from the rest of the building and can help it to integrate signage. The cornice profiles have been reduced substantially based on conversations with urban design staff. so that they still present and capture the building, but better reflect the scale of other buildings in the neighborhood and also differentiate between the eight-story mass and the six-story mass of the building. These aerial views show our 3D model within the Cambridge model, the city model. So if you look at the building from above, it's clear how it relates to the context in both massing and material. The six-story datum holds strong along Wendell Street and across the greater neighborhood. And the brick bookends and step backs at our site reflect the approach of many buildings in the area. The most important views will be that of a pedestrian. So we're starting here at the corner of Oxford and Wendell Street. The brick bookends reflect the brick building across the street, which was also inspiration for the cornice. If we walk closer to the building, you can start to see more of the shadow lines and more distinct textures as you get to see the feel for the pedestrian. If we shift even further west, but we're looking east now, you can see the effect of the brick detailing and how a pedestrian can start to engage with our site. Further down towards Mass Ave, the building relates to masonry buildings that are further down Wendell Street. And then shifting to the rear at Mellon Street, the facade is more unique. It has the top of the building with a lighter color palette. Shifting to the site design, at the August planning board meeting, we heard the desire for a more cohesive site design. Since then, we've worked very closely with our Atlantic architect to balance aesthetic design, site needs above and below ground, and compliance with the city's sustainability goals. At the front, we reorganized the Wendell streetscape to both rationalize the flow of residents and hub users from the street to engage pedestrians along the sidewalk through the use of greenery and features such as the little library area. At the rear of the building, the courtyard has been softened with greenery and updated with more distinct zones for the residents to enjoy. If we take a closer look along Wendell Street from left to right, we have that little library that references an existing little library on site that will have playful seating adjacent with additional plantings. At the middle, we have the residential entry. That's a foot wide walkway from the sidewalk to the lobby. Adjacent to that is six visitor bike parking spaces. That's been reoriented since the last version. Allows for a better flow of circulation. Make sure it doesn't interfere with the walkway or the bench that's located under the canopy. And then there's another area of table and chairs adjacent to that for the residential area. And then, all the way to the right that's for the Community hub space more of a Plaza feel want that to feel distinct, but it has a bench that is still harmonious with the other furniture. But more of a communal seating experience, there are more bike racks adjacent to that and then there's a path for the interior residential bike parking. So if we're looking at the rendering on Wendell, as you approach from the east, so very close to the hub, you can see that kind of more communal seating and the bike racks adjacent. Pedestrians experience enhanced streetscape with additional and varied plantings and seatings, and that's also enhanced by the variation and setbacks of the building. We shift into the courtyard. There were a number of updates here responding to Planning Board comment, most notably the softening of the area with added greenery. We focus on three distinct spaces defined by use, furniture, and plantings. The paving pattern also defines space to help with circulation and mobility, something we think is really important for the older adult population and planning for a variety of mobility needs. The pathways are punctuated by large canopy tree that will act as a focal point and provide shade for the seating plaza. And our landscape architects carefully coordinated the location of that central canopy tree and the understory tree that we added, the southwest corner, with the project engineers to make sure they don't interfere with underground stormwater retention and that there is safe distance from the building structure. So you can see the seating adjacent in the plaza adjacent to the indoor sunroom will have beautiful movable furniture with tables and comfortable chairs. And across from that, there is a playful seating area, tree stumps for kids to climb and step on. And then to the side, there's a more protected area. You can see the picnic table in this rendering covered by a shade trellis. We envision that will be used by families for gatherings such as birthday parties. This is really showing how we envision this space to be a private backyard for the residents. Lots of options for different types of interactions. You can see how we've got the dining area with the tables and trellis. The movable furniture creates a plaza and then we have that play area with natural elements. The courtyard fence and really the whole site fence is intended to be metal and that's similar to what's shown in the photo. The railings of the fence can be integrated into the trellis design and then hardwood panels can be used for screening. Those come in many patterns as shown in the illustrations. The site wall is stone, and that creates another opportunity for seeding, brings in another texture

Thank you, Gabby. Sorry. Thank you, Gabby. So just to wrap up, we thank you again for your time here tonight to everyone who's on the Zoom. Moving forward, we will continue to refine elements of this design as well as continue to work on the financing to deliver these critically needed homes. And we look forward to hearing your comments and discussing this project together.

Great. Thank you very much. So according to the zoning, we take public comment at these design review sessions and I would like to remind speaker that speakers at the board's action is not to approve or deny this application, but to provide advisory comments on the design that was presented. Any members of the public who wish to speak should now click the button that says raise hand. If you're calling in by phone, you can raise your hand by pressing star 9. As of 5 p.m. yesterday, the board had received written comments from Lou Wargraft, Rachel Plummer, Lynn Reese, Tessa Green, Ethan Frank, Ben Wargraf, Elizabeth Terry, and Ted Live. Written communications received after 5 p.m. yesterday will be entered into the record. I will now ask staff to unmute speakers one at a time. You should begin by saying your name and address. and staff can confirm that we can hear you. After that, you will have up to three minutes to speak before I ask you to wrap up.

Thank you. This is Jeff Roberts. We have a number of speakers, so I'll do what I typically do with this number and read the next speaker and then the following speaker so that everyone can be ready. And just as a reminder, I'm just reading the names as they come up on the Zoom. So please be sure to restate your name and your address so that we have the correct address. or so they have the correct name because it's not always the same as what's on the zoom so the first speaker will be eugene kim who's followed by peter norenberg and you can begin with unmuting and giving your name and address hello can everybody hear me yes

Okay, this is Eugene Kim, resident of 29 Wendell Street. I will start. So I think we've had a number of discussions among the neighbors, and I think it's fair to say that we're very strong supporters of affordable housing. However, the proposed eight-story, 95-unit tower far exceeds what this site and the surrounding streets can reasonably support. Even relying solely on the developer's own comments, we think that we feel that the project raises major concerns regarding one, excessive scale and quality of life impacts, two, unsustainable infrastructure burdens, and then three, worsening traffic near a school and university quarters. talking about the excessive scale and density that will harm the quality of life. The project proposes to replace two small three-story buildings on a tennis court with an eight-story 95-unit tower, which we all know the building would stretch 166 feet along Wendell Street and rise far above the neighborhood's two- and three-story residential pattern. City reviewers themselves warn that the massing reinforces the difference in scale between the project and its context, but I think only minor cosmetic changes have been made. Secondly, with regard to the infrastructure, we think that the infrastructure demands are far beyond what the area can support. Talking about sewer load, the sewage output currently is about 3,000 gallons a day. That would jump to about 19,900 gallons per day or a 6.7 fold increase placed on a tiny 12-inch sewer main. Because the increase surpasses the 15,000 threshold, the city requires participation in the four to one infiltration mitigation program, which to us is a clear sign that the system is already strained. Secondly, the water supply. The building relies on an eight inch cast iron water main. It adds major new domestic and fire protection demands. No evidence is provided that this small main can support the needs of 95 additional households, seniors, or the building's proposed hub space. Also, there's electrical considerations and then parking. The proposal only provides five parking spaces for 95 apartments. This will simply push dozens of cars into neighboring streets that are already at capacity, harming both new and long-term residents. And then finally, the traffic impacts public school as well as university corridors. I'm sure many of you know Wendell Street is a one-way. It's a major exit for Harvard University commuters. Wendell Street is already backed up tremendously during commuting time, so this will only add to that strain. In conclusion, the neighborhood fully supports affordable housing, but it must be built responsibly, and based on the developer's own materials, the proposed eight-story tower is way too tall, too dense, and too demanding on utilities and streets to function safely and sustainably. A moderately scaled context-appropriate affordable building could deliver much needed housing without compromising quality of life, infrastructure, or safety.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. The next speaker is Peter Norenberg, who's followed by Lynn Rice.

Can you hear me? Yes. Great. Peter Norenberg, 15 Wendell Street. Everything that Eugene has said, I agree with, and I think the neighbors agree with. No man is an island, nor is any building. and neither can exist apart from their environment. Not only is a building not an island, it's not an ocean liner that can be docked for a short period of time before moving on or sailing on. Despite somewhat resembling a cruise ship in its aesthetics and proportions, I think the proposed structure would be on Wendell Street for a very long time, and I think the planning board has not adequately addressed the burdens. that it would have on the neighborhood. Simply put, you can't change the environmental and infrastructural impact of a building this size by just changing a cornice detail or the color of the siding. It's all about scale and it's about density and a tenfold density that it would bring to the block would just completely impact in a negative way everyone who lives on wendell street but also all of the people who use wendell street to commute remember this street is a narrow one-way street it's already overburdened it serves two colleges and an elementary school So I think the infrastructure issues that Eugene raised are all great. Even if there was some way to solve them all, though, I think the problem here is one of scale. And I also wonder about the logistics of constructing this envisioned colossus. Given the amount of steel being used to build it and the tight ratios of the lot size to the size of the building, where exactly would the construction even be staged? How many years will it take? How long would the street be closed to traffic? What environmental risks will be occasioned by the demolition of the two buildings that have been sadly empty for the last three years, as well as the construction of the building intended to replace them? I do not doubt that the path that has been taken to get this plan before the planning board has been lined with good intentions. Indeed, I fear that it's precisely such good intentions that have allowed many supporters of affordable housing, of which I am one, to overlook the folly of what is being proposed. And with that, I implore the planning board to dig deeper before encouraging the project to proceed in its current form. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. The next speaker is Lynn Rice, who's followed by Zoom, just as Zoom user for the next speaker. Lynn Rice, you can, yeah.

Okay. Lynn Rice. I live at 76 Oxford Street around the corner. I would like to focus on the design requests. I would like to see a dedicated on-site space for repair vehicles, deliveries, garbage collection, and such. The Uber, Amazon deliveries, et cetera. Wendell has been spoken of so eloquently is a one-way street and is easily blocked. Last Thursday, I spent 20 minutes sitting through six or seven lights in And that's before the house, the building has been built. And it wasn't rush hour. I also would like to see advanced planning for future housing development with infrastructure, sewerage, water supply, electrical and parking. The overall situation is too massive for the street and for the neighborhood. And I thought the plan was to have the larger Taller buildings to be on the main corridors and the squares, and this is neither. The largest building nearby is on the corner of Wendell and Oxford, and it's four stories, and that's pretty massive. Eight stories is too much. I also want to hear about planning for the construction related issues, which will be significant. Already Wendell Street is blocked or compromised. This is clearly going to go on for a while. I hope that there is on-site availability for the trucks and the deliveries that have to go into this. So that's another design request. Thank you.

Thank you. And the next speaker is just says Zoom user, and that speaker is followed by Glenna Wyman. Hello? If someone's speaking, we can't hear you. Whoever's logged in as Zoom user, I'm going to move on and I'm going to lower your hand. And if you can resolve the technical difficulty, you can raise your hand again and I'll come back to you. But just for the sake of those waiting, I'll go to Glenna Wyman, who's followed by Benjamin Wergeft.

Hi, can you hear me?

Yes.

My name is Glenna Wyman.

I live in CHA Senior Housing, eight-story building in East Cambridge that just underwent a, well, three years ago, finished a major rehab. We're in a neighborhood with many three-story or two-story buildings And it is well received and has been for decades in East Cambridge. There are comparable buildings at the JFK building near Central Square, near a block or two away from the Whole Foods that looks beautiful in that neighborhood. I've also lived in that building. And there's also a partly 12-story, partly less than 12-story LDJ in Cambridgeport that is well-received by the people who live there. So I would, to the degree that you need to address some of these concerns raised by the residents. Okay. But it really kind of seems like they're just opposed to the size of the building. And I think it looks pretty beautiful. And, and, you know, the lack of parking is kind of consistent with the city's direction and trying to encourage non-use of cars by all of us. And they provide a lot of bicycle space for the residents. I also want to applaud that there is going to be 40 units of senior housing in the mix. So I urge the planning board to the degree that they feel that there are legitimate concerns raised that they be addressed, but that is being supported to move on. I think it's great. We haven't had a new 100% affordable medium size. This is not the kind of adjectives that some of the people around it are using, it's a moderate-sized development and much needed. And many, many people in Cambridge on waiting lists would benefit from it. So thank you very much to HRI for the work it's done to bring this forth. Thank you.

Thank you.

The next speaker is Benjamin Wergaft, who's followed by Ted Liv.

Hi, this is Ben. Can you hear me?

Yes.

Thank you so much. My name is Ben Wergaft. I'm at 6 Cypress Street, and I welcome affordable housing across the street from 35 Wendell Street, the house where I grew up. I do not welcome this building. The proposed building is massive and out of scale with its site. It is not moderate. It will damage and transform the neighborhood for the worse, both during construction and during its use. It will destroy mature trees. It will amplify an existing parking problem many times over. it will create havoc. I would personally welcome considerably smaller structures. The larger story here, I think, is about the failure to plan housing in Cambridge, which makes projects like this one, in which developers max out the parcels available to them regardless of the bad results, possible. Wendell Street is not the only place where this is happening, but it is one of the worst examples I've seen. HRI says that they work with the community. This has not been my experience. They continue to ignore our objections to the building scale, while pretending that decorating the building surface can help it to blend in. Now, I have to stress this. Everyone I talk to in Cambridge knows about the affordability crisis. Everyone I talk to is in favor of some version of affordable housing, and no one is against it on principle. We want versions of affordable housing we can all live with. Thanks so much for your attention.

Thank you. The next speaker is Ted Liv, who's followed by Deborah Fox.

Hi, I'm Ted live 17 Wendell street. The design of this building is just completely inappropriate for its location. The scale and bulk are just incompatible with the environment around it. A smaller structure could blend in with the neighborhood, but this eight story block stretching 160 plus feet along the sidewalk, has no relationship to the surroundings. It belongs on Mass Ave, not on Wendell Street. The five parking spaces that it's going to provide are for staff and service vehicles, not for residents. And HRI's working assumption that none of the residents will have cars is laughable. Parking in the area is already constricted. And furthermore, from a traffic point of view, adding delivery and ride hail vehicles to serve 95 units is going to mean that backups on one lane Wendell Street will often translate into backups on Oxford. The justification for this massive structure is that maximizes for helps maximize affordable housing in Cambridge. But the high per unit cost for the eight story 95 unit structure means that the amount of funding is going to require. Could construct far more housing units if they were in smaller projects. Thank you.

Thank you. The next speaker is Deborah Fox, who's followed by another speaker under the name Benjamin Wergaft.

Hello, can you hear me?

Yes.

Great. My name is Deborah Fox and I'm a homeowner at 35 Blake Street in Cambridge and a longtime board member of HRI. I strongly support the project that HRI has developed for this site. It provides much needed family and senior housing. As a board member, I'm very aware of how hard the team has worked to advance the design with input from the community, the city, and the planning board. Upon completion of the building, it will be an important asset in the community, not only for the housing, but HRI has an excellent track record of maintaining its buildings and supporting its residents. Thank you.

Thank you.

The next speaker is also under the name Benjamin Wergaft. I assume this is another speaker, and you can give your name, and then followed by Susan Richards.

Can you hear me? My name is Lou Wergaft.

Yes.

I'm Ben's dad. I actually live at 35 Wendell Street immediately across from this HRI project. And what I would say is that I would really welcome an affordable housing project that attempts to fit into the environmental... physical and environmental features of Wendell Street as it exists. But this project, as you've already heard from previous speakers, does precisely the opposite. It is, by the standards of Wendell Street, at least a monumental building that would dwarf all the other structures around it. And in the process of that, adding too great a burden of density and magnitude to be sustained in that area. You've already, previous speakers have already talked about the strain on the infrastructure and the parking problems that it would create. I also want to just address the relationship of the street and the community to HRI in this process. First, we were never consulted about the plan for 2830 Wendell Street before it was presented to us. And As the increasing discontent of the neighborhood with the project has become evident, the explanation is the HRI has offered no substantive defense of the design and the density of the project, but always falls back on the magic words of right. and at each continues to repeat that carefully repeat that at each one of our sessions i would like to offer this notion and maybe it's too obvious but there's a much more compelling standard by which we attempt to plan our lives and to plan our cities and that is the standard of reasonableness and of proportion and in that respect uh this hri project completely fails to meet the needs of the neighborhood in the community thank you the next speaker is susan richards who's followed by james zahl

Hi, can you hear me? Yes. My name is Susan Richards. I just want to start off by saying my parents bought their house on Antrim Street in 1961 for $17,000, a single family house. So my family has lived in the city for multiple generations. And when people say they support affordability, This city has changed dramatically where it really is not affordable for middle class families or working class families to live or even rent. And so I think it's really important for us to take seriously what it's going to take to create more balance in this city that we've completely lost. And I live at 316 Rinjav and I have for 20 years in inclusionary housing, which is really important for my ability to stay in this city. I would otherwise not be able to in terms of affordability. I live next door to Ringe Towers, which I don't know, Eleni probably knows it's like 24 story, three buildings lined up right next door to me. I'm looking out my window at them right now. And that is, we're talking mammoth, right? Like the biggest buildings in this city. And I really liked what Glenna, I think it was Glenna said about all the senior buildings that are actually in several neighborhoods embedded into neighborhoods like this neighborhood in Cambridge. and that have found homes, these big buildings in neighborhoods successfully. And I will say that although the Spring Towers has got so many people living in it, My joy at the fact that the families who live in those buildings can live in Cambridge and be part of this community makes a huge difference. And so in comparison to like an eight story building in the Baldwin neighborhood, this feels really critical to create spaces in all of our neighborhoods in Cambridge and Baldwin really hasn't had anything. like this before, so that our city really does make space for seniors, for people who couldn't otherwise live here. And I get it. It feels really big. And we have to weigh the aesthetic and the size and the scale with the fact that this city has completely lost AFFORDABILITY AND WE HAVE TO WORK REALLY HARD TO GET OUR CITY BACK TO A BALANCED PLACE WHERE PEOPLE OF ALL DIFFERENT INCOMES CAN CALL THIS HOME. AND I REALLY RESPECT THE WORK THAT HRI HAS DONE AND CONTINUES TO DO TO RESPECTFULLY MAINTAIN HEALTHY BUILDINGS, SUPPORT THEIR FAMILIES AND RESIDENTS. AND I THINK WE'LL BE A GREAT PARTNER IN THIS COMMUNITY. And hopefully the folks who live close by, I respect that you guys are having to live with this directly, will find that HRI will work really well through this process and into the future of this building's life. Thank you.

Thank you.

The next speaker is James Zoll, who's followed by Gabriel M.

Thank you. This is James Zoll, 203 Pemberton Street. I'd like to start by thanking everyone who's had input into this project. I think that HRI and Icahn Architecture have come up with a very good looking building that should serve the purposes that it was intended to serve. especially to include a large block of homes here for seniors. I think there's only one other AHL project that has done that. I've heard a lot of people say that they support affordable housing but then continue to have nothing but negative things to say about affordable housing which is pretty curious. I want to circle back to something that Jeff Roberts mentioned at the beginning that the purpose of this meeting is is not to give a yes or no answer to this project. And there've been several comments about that. And I think that the switch from the city's housing policy, the policy that was in place for decades, that allowed neighbors to dictate what was going to go into their neighborhood and to exclude many people from living in their particular part of the city had a lot to do with changing this to buy right. There's lots of people who are getting pushed out of the city, having trouble finding homes that are affordable. And yet we have a few neighbors who say it's not reasonable or it's out of proportion to build housing for them. I've heard that somehow if these affordable housing buildings were smaller, we can still have all the units that we need. That is something that doesn't pass the reasonable test for me. So I hope that things will go well. and uh in time this will be under construction and the for a limited period there will be some disruption on the street and after that i think that wendell street will have lots of new neighbors and um I'm glad that this can be done here in Cambridge, even though some other cities in the area see things very differently. I'm proud of the way Cambridge is doing things. Thank you.

Thank you. And the next speaker is Gabriel M., who's followed by Valerie Ann Bonds.

Hi there. Thank you for your time. I'll keep my comments brief. I'm really excited about this. Oh, sorry. I live at 31 Wendell Street, so directly across the street. I'm really excited about all the city is doing to advance affordable housing in our city. I just wanted to say that. And also coming as someone who grew up in a rural area, I think it's funny, you know, people out in the suburbs kind of lose their minds over a four-unit apartment building. You know, that's obviously not what we're talking about here. And so, you know, when I talk to my neighbors, we're excited about an affordable housing development going in. I won't play into the previous speaker's notion about a sort of false notion here. We are very much pro affordable housing. We're simply asking for something at a reasonable scale for our neighborhood. And one number that I personally like is give us six store give us 80 units of that. I do think there are some serious concerns that the developer's own engineers pointed out around the sort of six-fold increase in sewage and water requirements. as well as the inability to meet the environmental goals around phosphorus reduction. So I really would like to see the city and the developer take those seriously. And if it's really responsible to build something this dense and large on the block, if that's really doable. But otherwise, I would love to see a bunch of units come online at six stories, ideally a couple of buildings. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

And the next speaker in the last hand that's raised is Valerie Ann Bonds. So if you were intending to speak then and you have not had a chance to speak, now is the time to push the raise hand button so that we can get you in the queue and make sure we hear from you before the end. So you can go ahead.

Thank you. My name is Valerie Barnes. I am the president of the Mass Senior Action Council. And we were contacted to consider the support, whether or not to support the Wendell Street project. I live in an HRI development. I live here at 812 Memorial Drive. It used to be referred to as the 808 812 Memorial Drive housing development, and now it's called Rivermark. CERTAINLY THE IMPORTANCE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND NOT ONLY AFFORDABLE BUT DEEPLY AFFORDABLE IS NECESSARY. I RESPECT THOSE WHO ATTENDED AS NIMBY'S AND YIMBY'S BUT AGAIN THE INFLUX OF INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE INCREASED THE COST OF HOUSING, WHO HAVE COME TO OUR COMMUNITY TO ATTEND OUR COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITIES and have loved Cambridge so much that they have stayed with their high salaries, and developers have taken advantage of these high salaries and made Cambridge almost inaccessible to working communities, middle class communities, and even teachers, some lawyers, and our police officers. Having been a resident of the HRI Housing Development since 1987, I have seen its growth and I believe that a collaboration can be met between the individuals of the Wendell Street area as well as the leadership and administration of HRI. I would like to know if this presentation is available. I also noticed in the presentation I didn't see any security offices and here at 808 812 Memorial Drive we have security people to ensure the safety and security of the people who live here. I also didn't notice a smoking area outside and there's a smoking area here at the 812 complex and wondering whether that is going to be considered. I also believe that members of the Wendell Street area should look into visiting other HRI properties to see how well they blend into the community. Property at 1221 Cambridge Street in Inman Square, Columbia Terrace. And of course, you're welcome to visit here. Since the renovation, an ecstatic, colorful, engaging community has been established. created here and some of the community engagement that has been offered to the Wendell Street community. I'm hoping that HRI will engage in that same type of community engagement here at the other HRI developments across the city. uh land is scarce and the need is great and we all have to make sacrifices thank you hri eleni and sarah and i appreciate all of those who attended this forum thank you so that appears to be the list of speakers so i will turn it back to the chair

Thank you very much, Jeff, and thank you to all the members of the public for your input. So we'll now move from public comment to board discussion. Additional written comments may be submitted for the record. At this point, I would like to solicit any questions that the board might have for the project team or staff about the project. Diego.

Um, yeah, question on the, uh, reveal in the center of the building that goes up to the 6th floor. Just curious why, why not take that all the way up? And I guess my. My thought is that in sort of kind of messes with the floor plan a little bit. Um, I don't know if you want to talk a little bit about that. I saw it in the urban design comments and it was 1 that stood out to me. I'm a fan of the. the reveal sort of in the street level perspective, but then the elevation view, I kind of wonder why not go all the way up. Thank you.

Am I answering or are we taking all of them?

I think we could answer questions one at a time.

Okay, thanks. Yes, from a floor plan perspective, so we have units on that side of the building that are one bedroom that are for families. versus seniors. So we took that opportunity of the space that wasn't required. The seniors need more space for accessibility reasons. So we used that to our advantage to carve out that space for the reveal. So from a functional perspective, that worked. From kind of a design ethos perspective, we really wanted the eight story mass to feel like one volume. And so going all the way up would break it into two masses, which wasn't really our intention.

Okay. I'm sure others may have questions about that, but thank you for the start of that. Ashley?

Thank you. I have a few questions. So two are just like number of questions, which I couldn't figure off looking at the plans, which is I was wondering if the proponents know the width of Wendell Street, just comparatively to building high and also the setbacks I think the side setbacks between the two neighbors I couldn't quite figure that out from the plans and in terms of one of the I guess a comment that came up a few times in the public comment which is if there are you know ride share or delivery cars are they allowed to park in the parking spaces or is that purely for more long-term use, like employees and whatnot. And the last question is, so I saw there were some, looks like maybe like larger and more mature trees that will need to be removed on the, I think it's like plan right of the plans, which I'm guessing, I don't know if it's actually the east, but I'm just wondering if you can talk briefly about, you know, any mitigation for that. Thank you.

Eleni, if you want to take the parking, I'm going to try to find the dimensions that she requested.

Yep. So for the parking, we imagine that people would pull in to drop folks off. People can pull into the driveway that's there or into the garage. It is van height accessible. So if someone were utilizing the ride, for example, they'd be able to enter the garage and get dropped off. There's a door that goes into the building. In terms of the mature tree, so if you're thinking of plan right, this is the eastern property line. So it's on the property line. So we'd have to discuss that with the property owner next door. Whenever a tree is on a property line, both parties have to be in agreement about what goes on there. And so we just need to find out more what they are planning. There is a tree on the back. property line that is in very bad shape. It actually has a wire going right through it. So the arborist that we spoke with had said that it would be best to take that down. And then there is one mature tree in the middle of the site that will be taken down that's unavoidable.

Can you talk about, you know, are there any replacements or?

Yes. So we were, Gabby, is it two canopy trees that we're adding? There's one in the front, which is in the public right of way. And then one in the courtyard. There are, we are keeping the street trees that are there currently. And I think we're, we've talked to the arborist about maybe adding one more street tree along Wendell. And then we're adding a bunch of understory trees as well in the front and in the back.

I had the dimensions pulled up if you want to repeat what it was you were asking for.

Thank you. I was just curious if you knew the width of Wendell. I know it's been mentioned a few times. It's a one-way street, but it's, you know, one way can be very narrow or very wide. And I'm also curious about the setback, you know, between the two sides, I guess, side setbacks.

Okay. Yes. So the curb to curb in front of our building is a little over 30 feet. for the width of the street. And then for the setbacks, are you talking about at the side, like on the east and west from the building to the property line? You can pull that up. On the east side, it's just over seven and on the west side, it's just over five. Okay.

Okay, Ashley. Ted?

Yeah, I'm sorry. That's okay. Going back to the reveal, the notch, I'm curious, have you used this in other buildings before? Have you seen other buildings that have such a narrow reveal? I'm concerned that it is going to just get filled with trash or leaves or other things that are windblown and is just going to not look like it looks in the renderings. And I'll just go through with all my questions about that. In the earlier plans for this rendition, it appeared to me that the entry canopy was not lined up with the reveal. On what we looked at today, I might be wrong about that, but I'd like to have confirmation that what I saw the other day is not indeed the way it is set up because it looks like the canopy and the entrance just seem to be offline with the reveal. I have a question about the brickwork and a couple of locales. It seems that one of the corners or both of the corners on the Wendell Street facade, the brick stops like one or two courses below the cornice line. And I just wondered why that was the case, because it is not the case at the ground level, which there's sort of some rounding of the bricks in the corner. and that rounding goes all the way down to the ground, but does not continue all the way up to the cornice. Have you thought of what you plan to do about the garage door? because that is really fair pretty unsightly you know right on the corner on uh wendell street um it's you know unfortunate that the entryway to the to the basement, to the garage, whatever is down there, is right on Wendell Street rather than on one of the sides. And just having that huge garage door as just a big blank seems very unappealing to me. I have some questions about the lentils and the brickwork, but they're not really questions, they're just my opinions of how they might look differently. So I'll save that for discussion. Yeah, thank you, Ted.

Sure, I can try to take them in order. So the inset, if I can share my screen again. So the depth of the reveal is two feet, but the width is 30 inches. I can't say... if we have an exact width of that on any of our other projects. But I brought up this image in particular to show that it doesn't go to the ground, but also we have a cant at the bottom, so it's not meant to collect anything. I don't think anything would get trapped there, I think was your first question. And the idea is that with the 30 inches, it should be gracious enough that there wouldn't be any issues. And then you were asking whether or not this aligned with the canopy. Yes. That was... the intention here, but there's like the profile isn't completely straight. So I think we can look at how we want to detail that exactly. I think we were thinking the very innermost part would align, but we can make sure that that is, you know, detailed more deliberately. And I see your point on the transition from the brick coursing to the cornice. I think we were just thinking through like constructability if it would make more sense for that to be a straight corner for the transition to the cornice, but we can think through that as well. For the garage door, It's, yeah, it's a tough one. The idea for that was that we would have a color close enough to the brick where it would hopefully recede. But we're still working on how we want to handle the little library area. So we may, you know, that may come into play as we work through that area along that stretch here.

Yeah, if I may just add something there. Thank you for bringing this up. This is something that we've been thinking through a lot and think there is a lot of potential for changes in terms of how that reads from the street. We've also talked about public art on that side. So rather than it receding, actually making it into some sort of mural or some sort of colorful piece uh pallet which we've seen work on other buildings but we certainly welcome your comments and suggestions there okay ted you had your questions answered i i i think so i okay i'll leave things for discussion yeah okay fair enough thank you um mary great

Thank you. And thank you all for your presentation. It's great to see the project again. I had two questions. I was wondering, one, if you could talk to the planting of the canopy tree in the courtyard. It looks like it's in 34 square feet of a planting area with permeable pavers around it. Is there... Basically, I'm looking at soil volume. It looks like you'd only be able to get about 100 cubic feet, which isn't enough for a canopy tree. Is there an idea that it's some sort of a sand based structural soil? Does that really work with permeable pavers? And then my second sort of related to planting question is, on the west side of the building and the south there's some maintenance doors that come off right onto lawn um and so wondering the three at the bottom and then the one on the the left up near the front of the building um is there is that intentional or will that be a hardscape and um yeah wondering um what the idea is about the maintenance doors onto lawn areas

Just pulling up the site plan here. Unfortunately, we don't have our landscape architect on the call. And I don't know enough about the canopy tree to be able to answer your question. We did look at that along with the stormwater. So I know she's looked at it. But we can definitely review that more closely with her.

And we can follow up with you, Mary. That would be great.

Yeah. Yeah. And then, yeah, if you follow up on the lawn as well, do you think that's just kind of something that will get resolved on the upper left?

No, that's because we were really struggling with the cool score. Got it. So we can look at what that means. But because they would be used so imprequently and we'll have – the door will be set above the ground.

Yeah, it will be set above the ground. I guess I'm wondering – you know even though it's working with a green score it looks like you have kind of a drip edge elsewhere and it's it's like you just it just gets abandoned in those moments I was wondering on the left side you know where you have the parking entry there's kind of a square that doesn't look like that's where the um trash pickup would go oh okay okay all right we're happy to look at this with you like try to take every inch we can I bet okay those are my questions thank you

Thank you, Mary. And forgive me, Daniel and Carolyn, Dan and Carolyn, I didn't know who raised their hand next in order, but we'll do it alphabetically, Carolyn.

I think I snuck in on Dan there, but I'll take it. Okay. Thank you. So just to follow up on Ashley's question about the pickup and drop off or maybe something that I saw in the materials on pickup and drop off or both. In addition to the driveway, is there intended to be any 15 minute parking along the street for the Ubers of the world and the door dashes and all of that?

Um, that is not something that we can decide so that that may have been.

Yeah, sorry question for the city rather than.

Oh, sorry. No, no, no, you're you're I didn't clarify that. As of right now, it's not being proposed. Um, if it's something that people would want us to look into, we could talk to the transportation department and that's usually something that gets determined at building permit, I believe. We've done that on other projects, but that would also take away a spot. So, you know, it's a delicate balance there, but we can definitely, you know, have those conversations.

Yeah, I'm not necessarily advocating one where they that are curious and, you know, certainly did come up in the public comments. And then my other question was on the color of the bay on the southern, the bay color on the southern elevation. I think the pictures that you had of the materials and the materials that a couple of us went and saw in person showed the slate, not the charcoal. Is that right? I believe you had both. Oh, we did. Okay. The charcoal was the alt?

No, charcoal was the design, and I think we provided a few alternatives just so that you could see the palette that we're working with, like the material palette that exists.

Okay.

Thank you.

All right.

Thank you, Carolyn. Dan. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So I got a couple of questions that have maybe more to do with development than architectural treatment at the moment. I guess first off, what stage of design are you guys in right now? Are you close to going to permit entering construction documents?

We're at 70% CDs. And we have a long financing period with affordable housing. So we'll be applying for state financing this fall. And if everything... The fastest we could start, which we don't know what the state has in terms of their kind of docket of projects, but the earliest we would start construction would be mid-2027.

Okay, great. Thanks for that. So that kind of nicely leads to my next question. So you've submitted in the documents a preliminary budget. I think it's around $94 million. Is that accurate for where you are right now?

Yes.

Okay. Um, so a little bit of a question since, um, um, this goes a little bit to building height and density. Um, I certainly were supportive of as much affordable housing as we can get. Um, I also recall, I believe correctly that you guys reduced this from nine stories to eight. Is that the case as well?

Correct.

And that was probably to keep it within funding limits is more than building cost.

It was in response to the community.

In response to the community. Okay. Because, you know, I think our usual metrics right now have been, you know, somewhere around a million dollars a unit. So you're you're allying pretty closely with that. That's been typically not high rise construction. So I'm looking at this and saying, you guys are doing awesome at, you know, just barely over a million dollars a unit with high rise construction. So I wonder how you do it. But no, all joking aside, you know, it really goes to that decision about how much density is right. how much height can we get how that trades off for units because to take some of our neighbors concerns and saying hey why can't you do this at six stories you know you're losing 20 units right and that's that's hard one um and it goes a lot to a site that's expensive so your basis is high um So really internally, you guys made the calculation that, yeah, you could you could reduce the height by a story, but going less than that, the reduction in construction cost really didn't give you value in the end. Is that accurate?

Yeah, I can I can elaborate a little bit. So property. you know, cost of property is very expensive in Cambridge, as we all know. And so we want to make sure that we're being efficient with the resources that we are, you know, in partnership with the city. So there are certain goals around, you know, acquisition costs per unit, things like that. And in lengthy conversations with our city partners, we felt that going to eight stories was appropriate, but that was really the lowest that we could go and keep this building efficient in the many ways that you'd you mentioned. In terms of construction typology, yes, it is high rise, but we've found a way to keep costs low, or not low, but in line with others. And that is because we've been diligencing this with our general contractors since the start. We had them look at a bunch of different typologies, understand what the drawbacks and cost implications are. We looked at CLT that was not going to work for this project. we looked at typical steel construction that wasn't going to work. And Gabby can speak a little bit more to what we're proposing here. It is a proprietary system that uses steel, but in a bit of a different way than HiRISE. It allows us to be more efficient in our construction timeline and construction materials. A lot of the benefits other than cost in terms of building density here is that we can support a full management office for our residents. That's good for everyone. It means that we have onsite staff who can respond to any sort of maintenance call, resident need right away. At smaller sites, we can't do that. We can't support staff on site. So we'll be able to have a property manager, maintenance staff, in addition to a community engagement coordinator. And then we're actually also proposing a part-time engagement coordinator who will be there specifically for the older adults. And that's something that we're very excited to offer here and that's in great part because of the density of the site. Without the density here, we would not be able to support that staff through our operations.

Elaine, thank you very much. Yeah, I mean, obviously there's, for the neighborhood, right, we've got competing interests, right? How do we make this happen? I think you guys have done as good a job as one could do trying to get an eight-story building that meets those criteria to the neighborhood. I don't know that you were ever going to have absolute satisfaction. I guess the last, so thank you, the last question really has to do with private open space. And I know, you know, Open space is at a premium. I know that it's tight to fit a site on here. You've done better than our zoning setbacks. So, you know, you've given some light and air to both the residents and and the neighboring structures. Did you guys spend any time looking and thinking about either balconies or other above grade outdoor space?

We did look at balconies. Balconies can be really tricky. We have some properties with them. They are not used as much as we would hope for a variety of reasons. And we also have issues with folks using them as storage, which isn't great for the building. And here we really want to prioritize unit sizes and then also wanting to make sure we have that open space for gathering. The structural system that I mentioned before that was helpful cost-wise is a little bit more rigid in terms of the massing and how you construct the kind of the shape of the building. And so anything that projects off of the building is very tricky. Already, we have had extensive conversations with our structural engineer and with the structural system engineers around our cornices, which is nothing like a balcony. But you can imagine if we're having those conversations around a cornice, balcony or a bay would be very difficult.

Great. I guess the final piece on that, is there any green roof or accessible roof deck space or occupiable space?

There's not currently any space on the roof. The upper roof is going to be fully solar panel. And then the lower roof is pretty small. And again, we have found that with our maintenance folks and with our operations, the ground floor open space is much more utilized. So we spent our budget and our time designing there.

Great, no further questions, thank you.

Thank you, Ted. Ted, you have another question?

Yes, so maybe something I missed, but my assumption is that you will need, the building will need some sort of electrical switching system or transformer, and assuming that's the case, where is it proposed to be located?

Yes, we have a three-hour vault inside the building along Wendell Street that we've been in conversations with Eversource already coordinating the size and their access to it.

So that would be an interior, so it's not going to be outside?

It's not going to be outside. It's interior.

Thank you.

Great. I have a few questions. So you're at 70% CDs. I presume that you've got a civil engineer background. involved with the project at this point. There was a number of questions both in the correspondence and also in the questions we had tonight from abutters about the utilities that are supplying the particular site. Can you speak to how you might address some of those concerns both in the supply of water and dealing with effluent going out? Presumably that's been sized and engineered.

Yes, all that's been sized and reviewed by DPW already. As well, okay. Yes.

So both the city and, you know, your calculations plug into the city and the city is...

Yes, we do not have concerns about there not being adequate infrastructure for that.

Great, thank you. that is the sum total of my questions. Most of my federal board members seem to have covered most of my other concerns according to my notes from my review of materials. So at this point, we'll move from comments to discussion about the proposal that's in front of us. So I know Ted wanted to move some issues to discussion. I'm sure others feel the same way. So let's do that at this point. Discussion.

Ted. Well, I'll start. Could we go back to the facade, the Wendell Street facade? That's fine. I have to say that the lintels and the fact that there are none above the windows on the second floor are making my eyes twitch. And I'm just wondering why they're not there. And I understand you've got the course of soldier bricks there, but have you considered putting lentils there and dropping that course down under the bottom of the second floor window and then having a much larger band of brick all across? That's true on both the right and the left-hand side. The other question or the other thing, I guess I'm not the biggest fan of the recess or the notch, but I understand why you're doing it and other people may be strongly in favor of it. But the right hand side where the free library is, I think that still needs the ground floor of both the garage and the library. I think that whole first floor ground level really needs more thought. It doesn't seem like it has been really figured out yet. And that's a major aesthetic point of the building. People are going to be walking up and down wendell street and you know the the left hand side with the hub seems to me fine to me but the right hand side just seems that it just has not been uh fully baked yet and so i i i hope you and staff will continue working on that and especially something with the garage door. I'm not sure that having it match the brick is really the best idea, whether it was some sort of independent, different color, much like the doorframe around the hub and the entryway door and canopy. Just, I think, if it were something different, it would be a more attractive design. than what you have now. Those are really my comments. I mean, I liked the building before. I still like it, but I think, you know, some, you know, mild changes might even improve it. Thank you.

Thank you, Ted. Dan.

Thank you again, Tom. Mr. Chair, so just a few comments. One, I'm kind of with Ted on the, would maybe, it may just be a color issue if that is cast stone or other treatment that would disappear a little bit, or if it's a single double course on those treatments. Lentils that certainly jumps out at me, but maybe it's a lot of cooks in the kitchen. So I feel for you guys, but appreciate you're taking these comments to heart. I very much appreciate the relocation of the entry, which I had asked you to think out for the last time. I think it works. well with or without that notch. I would I think there's been some additional attention to the little library, but it could still have a little bit more life. I think maybe Mary might jump on that one. But I think that the piece that I think has evolved but could do a little bit more is actually at the rear of the building in that outdoor space. There's something about that base material and treatment of the windows that just doesn't enliven the space, the landscape. Again, I won't comment too much on this. Seems like it's really come along well, but the enclosure of that space, particularly carrying that that that kind of neutral colored base material around feels kind of deadening so i'm hoping you might think a little bit about um some texture and character of those exterior walls that might play with the uh the openings and access in there um again given that that's really the only only open and active private space for the building um like the canopy and in general um you know just really um I appreciate the work to try and bring the scale and livability down to the street edge. So I think that's really, really good for me. Otherwise, again, it's too many cooks in the kitchen. So thank you.

Great. Thanks, Dan. Diego.

Yeah, thank you for the presentation again. With TED, I liked the building to start in the first review that we had. I still like it. My only thing with the notch was if it's taking away from the function of the floor plan, then maybe lose it. I like it from the street view. I loved your explanation of why it sort of goes away. And I think with a story like that, it makes sense to keep it. I did like the little library before. I liked the brick aspect, how it was sort of rotated. And you had this really interesting design. There was a nice contrast with the colors. The courtyard in the back, on the ground floors, I think is pretty cool. I think it's neat that you guys have a tree back there. I didn't think that was possible. And it looks great. Yeah, and it's exciting to see a lot of units come to a neighborhood. Thanks.

Thank you, Diego. Ashley.

Thank you. And thank you, the project team, for coming back again. Trying to incorporate our comments from last time and staff's comments. I got a chance to walk along the street maybe two weeks ago. It was nice to be able to walk around and realize the street is very lush, as I think some neighbors pointed out and appreciate. But the other thing I actually noticed walking down that block was there actually are, obviously there are smaller scale buildings, but there are a fair number of four-story, pretty long, pretty large buildings that are at least, you know, 40 units. And there's, I would say, at least three of these buildings on the same block on Mundo and at the corner of Masters and even larger, I think, at the Harvard building, that's six stories. They're all, you know, the same color of brick. And so... um i appreciate that the project team tried to stick to the context and also do this um you know brick facade up to the sixth floor to match that um i think it's you know playing it safe and we can always see something more exciting but i appreciate that the proponents were trying to you know respect the context as best as possible. And so, you know, I think that part is, you know, I commend that. And it's interesting about the, what is it called, the reveal recess. You know, the purpose of having in the AHL ordinance that every, I can't remember the exact number, every 40 feet means some projection or recesses to break down buildings that might look very bulky or large. From the images provided, I'm not sure this recess or reveal, is that what it's called, does quite that. And so I think you know, a little more thought can be put into it. Even projections might also be good, whether it's two of those sets of bay or windows becoming projecting out might break things down a little bit. So don't have strong feelings about it, but just, you know, I think there can be a little more thought about what can be done to break down the length of the building. But otherwise, you know, going back to the point I said earlier about the street being very lush, you know, that's something that is beautiful. And so anything that can be done to create more canopy, create more green, I think on the Wendell front would be great. Thank you.

Great. Thank you, Ashley. Mary?

Thank you. And like everyone said, it was really helpful to hear the public comments. And it does sound like you all have been responsive in communicating with the community. And so I think some of those comments ended also with making sure that as construction occurs, that you continue that communication. You know, just the way you have been, I trust that you will. Um, so my comments are mostly about the open space. I feel like in the back in the courtyard, our comments last time, I feel like you guys responded. And, and, um, you know, I think Dan was the one who really talked about the spill out from these edge. Um, spaces, and even though the doors don't open the kind of Plaza condition, it feels a little bit more resolved with that spill out. But I would also say that, you know, maybe speaking to the green score, it feels a little bit patched together to try to hit a numeric target. My biggest concern in the back of the building is the location. um of some of these trees even along the fence line there's a proposed canopy tree down at the lower left is that a new one maybe this is just a follow-up question is that a new tree proposed at that corner we would have to look I don't think so though It says proposed tree canopy, but it might be a discrepancy between the illustrative and the plans. But I worry about the trees being placed with proper spacing away from edges so that as they grow their canopy, that it's not just impinging on the adjacent properties, right? And that there's actually space for the tree. The center tree in the courtyard, I think it's a great idea conceptually, but if you only... have the 34 square feet and it is permeable paving which typically doesn't go very well with the tree trench because the roots want to come up right so you'll have to do a lot to figure out how to basically hold them down like is it a suspended pavement system something that really holds it down i would just want to make sure and you guys offered and i'd love to see the plans and details as it develops what's your strategy for the soil because for a standalone tree you want to target a thousand cubic feet ideal. Even if you're not ideal, you're probably not all the way at 100. And if you're at 100, you're not going to get a 25 foot canopy. And so it's just being realistic about the space that exists in there so that there's not an over commitment, right, of what it could actually support. And then my urging, I think everyone else has said this, the little library side, even when you look at this, you can really see, it feels like the left feels much more attended to. And so I think as you continue to look at that, if you bring back that brick pattern, I thought it might be even more than what it was last time, but it seems like it's kind of gone away, that kind of fanciful, whimsical play with the brick. But I think that combined with Ted's urging to really look at the um the garage door entry just giving that side attention um and of course kind of my my comments about the maintenance doorways um i i hope that you'll keep pushing to figure out how to get the green score while also making sure that you know it's it's a reasonable and efficient, right? It's not an odd condition of grass just pulled right up to these doors because you have to meet a target. So I would just urge that you really look at those kind of edge conditions as much as possible with your landscape architect. But those are my comments. Thank you.

Thank you, Mary. Carolyn.

Thank you. So just to touch on that, the garage door, Little Free Library side, I was really happy to hear that you're still doing work on that, that you're thinking about murals, that you're thinking about livening it up. In particular on the garage door, and Ted touched on this, but I worry about... pedestrian safety if it blends too much into the brick wall. So adding some color on the garage door and reminding people that there is an active driveway there I think is helpful. And I'm certainly not an architect, but because you asked, my two cents is that the lighter color on the bays is a little bit, blends into that neighborhood in particular a little bit better than the darker, newer darker color. But again, lots of cooks in the kitchen. I'm not an architect, so do with that what you will. Thank you. Really fun to see the updates to the to the building.

Thank you. Well, I first of all wanted to thank everybody for their input and thank the petitioner for the materials they provided us in advance, which very clearly showed the ways in which the proposal that we're looking at today differs from what we looked at previously so that you took our comments to heart and not all of them. You did your very best to address the concerns of the planning board. So the process is working to some degree. We are working within the bounds of the laws and regulations, the zoning that defines what's possible here and very much appreciated the efforts to be as clear and transparent as you possibly could there. Most of my fellow board members have touched on things that I had in my notes, but two thoughts. One on the reveal. I absolutely understand why it's there. But I think there's a design opportunity there for that unique condition in the building that could be whimsical, could make more of a something that is a placemaking, which would make this more of a landmark of a building, you know, could it be glazed brick or some kind of a patterned. Or words even letters within that there's a long tradition of that in architecture. So I think there is a opportunity to take That particular detail and turn it into something that Would be more than just the mark that it is on the on the wall. I understand its position and I think architecturally it's clever that it doesn't go all the way up and split the building in half. It emphasizes the six-story datum. So, there's still more work to be done on that and you've fully admitted that in your presentation. The ground level is vastly improved in my opinion. It does not have the retail character that I commented on back in August. to the free library, I like Carolyn was struck and I think it was prompted by the rendering showing the child lurching towards with great excitement to the four books that were on the shelves. But that's right by the driveway. So there is a conflict there. And again, that condition is a design opportunity, I believe. And I don't think that the garage camouflaging the garage door necessarily is where you want to go with that. And maybe there's a fence or a way to detail that to make that more of a place and celebrate more of that condition. You know, we have free libraries all over Cambridge, but this is the first one that I'm aware of that is actually built within the volume of the building. And what a great moment that is, that this is more of a permanent kind of cultural thing that would happen in our city that celebrates, you know, a probably literary place. So I think there's an opportunity to make a wonderful neighborhood a feature on that corner and somehow resolve the conflict with the traffic. And the adjustments to the cornices I think have done exactly what we were encouraging you to do and made it look less bulky and less large. So I'm in favor of the project as it stands. You've worked really hard on this given all the constraints. that an affordable housing developer has to work within. And of course, I was reminded as I was looking at the materials that the as of right is not eight stories, it's 13 and that this developer has rudently said that's not the level that's appropriate for this community. So I appreciate that because we could be looking at a 13 story proposal and we're not. That said, I think we can forward, I know the staff is making careful notes of the comments from the board and from the general public and will take these comments and form a draft memo for us. Any other comments at this point? So I'm going to look for a motion to conclude the design consultation session and submit a final report with our comments based on the conversation tonight to the superintendent of buildings. Anybody in favor of that motion?

This is Diego, so moved.

Thank you, Diego. Looking for a second on that motion. Ted's second. Thank you, Ted. A roll call on that motion. Jeff, please.

On that motion, Ted Cohen. Yes. Mary Lidecker.

Yes.

Diego Macias. Yes. Ashley Tan.

Yes.

Carolyn Zurn.

Yes.

And Thompson Navish. Yes. It's all members present voting in favor.

Thank you. So this concludes the business on our agenda tonight. Are there any additional comments from staff or board members at this time?

Nothing from us. I think just again, as a reminder, it looks like we'll be meeting again in three weeks.

Great. Thank you very much, Jeff. And thank you to everybody who attended tonight and especially the petitioners. The meeting's adjourned. Good night. Thank you very much.