18:00The meeting delved deeply into the design and massing strategies for the redevelopment’s Blocks A, B, C, and E. A emphasis was placed on Block C, which is intended to activate the Summer Street edge and create a pedestrian-friendly environment. The design team discussed how the building’s articulation and massing could break up its scale. The design strategy incorporates elements from the historic turbine hall.

The project’s public realm was a critical aspect of the discussion. Presenters outlined plans for a vibrant public area with clear access to primary entries, such as hotel and residential lobbies, and a focus on creating a welcoming connection from the neighborhood into the site. Block A’s proposed massing strategy involves dividing the building into three sub-masses of decreasing sizes, responding to the adjacent buildings’ scale and enhancing open space for active ground floor uses.

The need for clarity in design intentions and their relationship to community needs was emphasized.

1:11:21Public comments were also a notable part of the meeting, reflecting community concerns related to the project’s architectural plans. Eileen Smith, a resident, voiced her apprehension about the lack of consistency in building designs, criticizing the proposed hotel as a “monster” that would overshadow the residential neighborhood. Other public commenters echoed these concerns, pointing out that some buildings fit the light industrial aesthetic while others seemed out of place within the residential context.

The discussion also touched on the logistical challenges of the review process. There was a proposal to allocate a special day for focused discussions on this project to ensure it would not be sidelined in the agenda. The importance of having a consistent team of reviewers throughout the project’s duration was also highlighted, with concerns that a rotating cast of voices might lead to confusion.

Commissioners considered the proposal to send the project to subcommittee for further review, a motion that received unanimous support. The emphasis was on maintaining a consistent team of reviewers to oversee the project as it progresses.