The meeting was presided over by Chairwoman Barbara Kerzac, with Vice Chair Gonan present. The main agenda was the ongoing evaluation of the application concerning the redevelopment on 1st Avenue, which had been under review since August 4. Kevin Kennedy, representing the applicant, opened discussions by acknowledging the board’s previous input and highlighted adjustments made to the project plans. These changes addressed concerns about the garage door design, lighting details, and the installation of an audiovisual alarm system. The board’s feedback had prompted a series of modifications aimed at improving the project’s alignment with city standards and enhancing community safety.

Doug Cleland, the civil engineer associated with the project, was called upon to provide testimony regarding the adjustments made. Cleland detailed several noteworthy changes, including the removal of a walkway to expand the rain garden, which would reduce impervious coverage and improve stormwater management. Additionally, the relocation of gas meters behind a fence was proposed to obscure them from public view, responding to concerns about their visibility. The lighting plan was revised to utilize 2,700 Kelvin lights instead of 3,000 Kelvin lights in the parking garage, and the mounting height of fixtures was adjusted to minimize visibility from the street. Louvers were added to the garage openings to hide light sources from pedestrians and vehicles, addressing aesthetic and safety concerns.

Further site enhancements included benches and a bike rack installation along Langford Street, although no bike rack was planned for the garage entrance due to adequate internal bicycle storage provisions. A visual and auditory pedestrian alert system was introduced to improve safety at the garage entry, particularly given the proximity to the sidewalk. Modifications were also made to ensure ADA compliance at ramp areas, with detectable warning strips aligned with existing crosswalks.

The board engaged in discussions about potential design waivers, particularly concerning freestanding signs. It was clarified that no freestanding signs would encroach on city rights-of-way, as signage would be placed on an awning. A waiver regarding an off-site stormwater plan was also addressed, with the board deeming it acceptable due to its minor nature. Conditions regarding landscaping maintenance were emphasized to ensure the longevity and effectiveness of the design.

The meeting further delved into concerns about the visibility of gas meters. A suggestion was made to replace the proposed picket fence with a stockade fence for better concealment. Landscaping, including evergreen shrubs, was proposed to offer additional screening, but the visibility of the meters remained a point of debate. The board emphasized the need for compliance with design recommendations and expressed a collaborative intent to achieve satisfactory outcomes.

Water quality and the use of pervious pavement in vehicle service areas were also topics of discussion. The project proposes pervious pavement to manage stormwater, with identified areas allowing for treatment before discharge. Clarifications regarding service locations and compliance with water quality standards were sought and provided.

Architect Dan Zenetto presented revised architectural plans, explaining changes made since the last presentation. Notably, a wall between columns was proposed to accommodate gas meters, and the ground floor plan was adjusted to increase the bioretention area size. Privacy fencing for the second-floor courtyard level was introduced to enhance separation between public and private spaces. On the fifth floor, a door to a common terrace was modified for accessibility compliance. Zenetto also described architectural revisions to the ground floor facade, aligning openings to create a cohesive appearance and shield lighting from pedestrians.

A discussion arose about the proposed signage, specifically an address sign on Second Avenue. The board determined that a design exception was necessary for the six-square-foot sign, which was deemed appropriate for the building’s scale. Clarifications were also sought regarding courtyard fencing. The board suggested incorporating a design with at least 30% openness to allow for better light and air circulation.

Compliance with affordable housing unit specifications was confirmed, with the project’s units meeting necessary size requirements. The inclusion of a car share program was deliberated, with confirmation that it would be optional. A decision regarding the roof design, whether to include a green roof or solar panels, remained open, dependent on construction feasibility.