I wish we didn't need to rely so much on advertising in public spaces. So much visual clutter. (wildly pristine/overly optimistic original photos below)
You can watch a recording of the meeting here: https://bpda.app.box.com/s/h0e4bhgfnaolgvacp11ohyzz1te7ukks
I'd estimate the comments were about 60:40 in support of the plan.
Only the backchanneling point was in reference to you. I watched the full presentation and was pointing out a number of remarks from the other commenters.
And I'm complete agreement about the use % being proposed being a problem.
Oh my god the pearl clutching. Scared about "shadows" from a development almost entirely north and west of existing buildings (people on A street sad they're gunna lose their city view). "Losing green space" to a proposed civic space within the proposed waterfront park area when the entire area...
None of the plans show that area as lawn (it doesn't show up in any renderings either). In the plans and aerial diagrams, lawn is a lighter green gradient in front of the church and fountain only. Planted areas are a darker green.
Ugly flat end facades with near-0 articulation. Ugly horizontally proportioned windows will dated/cheap looking mullions.
Above all, across from two of Boston's most beautiful classical buildings. It is a severe, depressing contrast.
The grilles will be covered (or at least mostly obscured) by awnings. You can see them in the earlier renderings and there are tabs for them to be installed eventually.
I can't get over how poor the choice of stone here is. It's too light, neutral, and devoid of variations so that the weathering takes the dominant texture. It looks like all the horizontal pieces already have streaks from moisture runoff. Will always look like it needs a powerwash.
They illustrated the wood texture in prior design renderings. I think it's probably an intended real texture byproduct of the precast process and there was some pigment added to the mix to get that warmer tone.