►
Description
Docket #0139- A hearing regarding two grants from the Massachusetts Gaming Commission, for a cumulative amount of $250,000, the purposes of which are to fund a portion of the City's cost for the design of the Rutherford Avenue/Sullivan Square Project
A
My
capacity
as
chair
of
the
City
Council's
Committee
on
planning
development
and
transportation
for
our
public
hearing
on
docket
zero,
one,
three
nine
message
and
order
authorizing
the
city
of
Boston
to
accept
and
expend
two
grants
from
the
Massachusetts
Gaming
Commission
for
a
cumulative
amount
of
$250,000.
The
purpose
of
the
grants
is
to
fund
a
portion
of
the
city's
cost
for
the
design
of
the
Rutherford
Avenue
Sullivan
square
project
matter
sponsored
by
Mayor,
Walsh
and
referred
to
committee.
A
January
24th
I
just
want
to
remind
everyone
here
that
this
meeting
is
being
taped
and
live
streamed
and
will
be
broadcast,
live
on
Comcast
8,
our
cnat
to
Verizon,
1964
and
also
available
later
on
the
city
council's
YouTube
channel.
So
thank
you
to
my
colleagues
for
joining
I'm
here
to
my
left
city,
councillor,
ed
Flynn,
also,
city
councilor,
Lydia,
Edwards
and
city
councilor,
at-large,
Aneesa,
sabe,
Jorge
and
with
us.
We
are
proud
to
have
our
transportation
transportation.
Commissioner,
Deputy
Commissioner.
A
B
Councilís,
thank
you
very
much
for
hosting
us
for
this
action
on
and
accept
and
expand
order.
This
is
pertaining
to
250,000
dollars
that
have
been
awarded
to
the
city
of
Boston
by
the
Gaming
Commission
Commonwealth
of
Massachusetts
Gaming
Commission
and
those
monies
are
under
a
a
pair
of
programs.
They
have
one
was
a
a
planning
grant
and
the
other
is
in
the
category
of
monies
that
they
set
aside
for
surrounding
communities
and
we
needed
to
declare
how
we
would
use
those
monies
as
well.
B
Our
application
was
for
funds
to
help
complete
the
design
process
of
a
project
known
as
Rutherford
Avenue
Sullivan
Square,
the
Rutherford
Avenue
Sullivan
square
project
goes
back
a
number
of
years.
It's
been
a
project
that
has
crossed
over
from
the
last
administration
through
this
administration
and
has
gone
through
a
reexamination
upon
the
the
conclusion
of
a
lengthy
process
which
ultimately
determined
that
there
would
be
a
casino
built
across
the
river.
B
Excuse
me
through
the
the
organization
known
as
the
Boston
NPO,
the
Boston
NPO
Metropolitan
Planning
Organization
is
an
entity
where
the
communities
in
and
around
Boston
get
to
compete
for
federal
dollars
that
are
matched
by
State
dollars
and
they
come
up
to
us
from
Washington
and
there's
an
annual
process,
and
we
were
very
successful
few
years
back
in
getting
this
project
funded
through
that
effort.
So,
as
I
said
to
the
tune
of
one
hundred
and
fifty
two
million
dollars,
another
process
that's
taking
place.
B
This
project
is
referred
to
as
a
low.
A
mystic
regional
working
group
in
the
lower
mystic
regional
working
group
sounds
like
quite
an
exotic
title,
I'll
admit
that,
but
it
basically
was
a
means
of
labeling.
It's
something
different
than
people
concerned
about
the
impacts
of
development
around
Sullivan
square.
So
it
wouldn't
get
confused
with
the
project
that
the
city
is
building
the
Rutherford
Sullivan
square
project.
B
So
through
this
low
of
Mystic
Regional
working
group,
we've
come
to
the
conclusion
with
a
number
of
partners
which
include
MassDOT,
the
Gaming
Commission,
Everett,
Somerville
and
MAPC
that
the
the
future
would
include
a
project
like
the
one
that
the
city
is
now
designing,
which
includes
under
passes
at
both
at
Sullivan
square
and
also
at
Austin.
Street.
These
under
passes
are
going
to
be
dramatically
different,
though
it
should
be
pointed
out
dramatically
different
than
what's
out
there
today.
A
lot
of
people
think
in
terms
of
oh,
it's
going
to
still
have
an
underpass
I'll.
B
Just
give
you
an
example:
the
at
Austin
Street.
There
are
six
lanes
of
traffic
and
underpass
in
that
underpass
they're
three
lanes
in
each
direction
in
the
future.
Under
our
plan,
there
will
be
two
lanes
in
one
direction:
one
lane
in
the
other
direction
at
Sullivan
Square,
the
underpass
that's
out
there
today
was
built
to
handle
a
different
type
of
traffic
than
we
envisioned
for
the
future
of
rather
than
that,
underpass
currently
is,
is
doing
its
job
with
one
lane
in
each
direction,
having
been
removed
from
the
two
lanes
in
each
direction.
B
It
creates
less
impact
on
pedestrians
and
bicyclists
that
are
using
a
Sullivan,
Square
area
to
not
have
to
deal
with
the
through
traffic.
That's
gonna
because
of
the
nature
of
the
geography
over
there
by
the
nature
of
it.
It's
going
to
be
compelled
to
be
up
at
surface
streets.
In
mixing
in
we've
got
lots
of
buses
and
trucks
that
can
be
totally
out
of
sight
out
of
mind
for
the
people
using
Sullivan
square
by
virtue
of
having
this
opportunity
for
that
regional
traffic
not
to
have
to
come
up
to
the
surface
streets.
B
That's
now
ongoing,
we'll
be
able
to
help
offset
that
the
20%
share
that
the
city
has
to
match
on
the
design
costs
and
we're
very
fortunate
that
we've
also
secured
federal
dollars
for
the
current
phase
of
the
design
and
we're
expecting
to,
and
that
would
cover
80%
of
the
money
where
the
city's
20%
can
be
in
a
sense
reduced
by
every
dollar
that
we
get
from
the
Gaming
Commission.
To
help
support
this
design.
Effort,
that'll
that'll,
be
a
credit
to
the
city's
account
in
terms
of
our
share
of
20%.
B
A
Thank
you
very
much
Jim
and
we're
also
joined
by
vice
chair
of
the
committee.
Councillor
Frank
Baker,
so
I
have
a
bunch
of
questions.
I'm
just
gonna
ask
a
few
and
then
hand
it
over
to
colleagues
and
I'll
clean
up
at
the
end,
so
just
on
funding
overall,
so
you
mentioned
that
we're
aiming
for
25%
design.
You
said
by
sometime
this
summer
this.
B
B
The
project's
estimated
to
cost
152
million,
and
we
have
that
amount
of
money
that
we've
secured
through
the
MPL
Boston
MPL
and
that
money
starts
to
become
available
in
the
year
2020.
It's
going
to
be.
The
funding
is
set
up
to
take
place
over
a
five
year
period
and
the
first
several
years
are
in
the
current
tip,
which
will
which
puts
us
in
a
very
good
position.
So.
B
B
B
In
action
on
the
plan,
there
are
a
number
of
communities
out
there
that
would
love
to
have
an
opportunity
to
secure
the
funds
that
we
now
have
for
other
projects.
That
would
compete
with
that
for
funding
and
if
we
don't
stay
dutifully
marching
ahead
with
that
design,
we
run
a
very
clear
risk
of
having
the
money
go
somewhere
else.
Okay,.
A
A
B
Yeah,
so
80%
is
federal.
It's
a
little
bit
shy
of
4
million
right.
That's
the
current
contract,
but
80%
of
it
would
be
from
federal
dollars
and
20%
would
be
a
combination
of
what
the
city
needs
to
chip
in
as
well
as
any
of
these
types
of
grants
that
were
able
to
secure
okay.
So
if
you
do
the
quick
math
on
the
first
phase,
using
for
ease
of
math,
the
40,
the
4
million
eight
hundred
thousand
dollars
is
the
city's
share
to
this.
B
B
People
who
don't
do
this
every
day
would
be
amazed
to
know
how
much
when
you
start
to
move
a
roadway
around
how
much
money
goes
into
getting
utilities
out
of
the
place
that
they
are.
We
want
to
make
sure
that
we
have
nice
open
space
and
development
parcels
at
the
end
of
this,
and
so
in
order
to
have
a
possible
of
land
be
useful
for
development.
You
can't
have
a
major
gas
pipe
going
under
it.
B
We've
had
conversations
recently
with
eversource
and,
as
they
are
planning
their
next
steps
to
enhance
the
system,
we
sit
with
them
and
have
conversations
where
we
say
you
can't
put
the
pipe
there
because
there's
a
future
development
possible
there.
Even
though
it
looks
like
a
roadway
to
you
today,
the
new
plan
is
changing
the
now.
The
plan
is
going
to
take
all
that
big
oval.
This
is,
you
know,
I
probably
should
say
have
pointed
to
about
that.
B
A
B
So
we
expect
to
continue
to
get
at
least
some
more
of
the
monies
from
the
federal
government
so
to
the
extent
they
were
able
to
as
we're
negotiating
the
subsequent
contracts.
We
do
two
contracts,
we
do
a
contract
with
the
with
the
engineering
firm,
our
consultant,
but
we
have
a
simultaneous
agreement
that
we
negotiate
with
MassDOT
MassDOT
being
the
conduit
for
federal
dollars,
we'll
be
looking
for
them
to
again
give
us
a
80
percent
federal
share.
Nothing
is
certain
as
we
go
forward,
so
every
dollar
counts
and.
B
A
B
We'll
be
watching
that
situation
clearly
carefully,
as
will
everybody
else,
and
the
I
think
that
the
good
news
here
is
that
we
had
this
project
on
the
books.
It
wasn't
a
project
that
was
awarded
because
Winn
showed
up.
The
difference
is
that
because
we
showed
up
and
because
all
of
these
other
developers
like
at
the
hood
properties-
and
you
know
throughout
Charlestown-
there's
lots
of
development
in
the
in
the
mill
now
in
that
across
across
the
river
up
in
Somerville
and
over
and
over
it.
There's
other
developments
taking
place.
B
C
Just
wanted
to
follow
up
with
a
two
brief
questions
you
mentioned:
80%
of
the
funding
is
federal.
What
federal
agency
is
that
from
all
federal
highway,
federal
highways?
Also
and
I
know
you
mentioned
you
working
close
with
MassDOT,
but
how
is
the
interaction
or
the
dialogue
between
your
department
in
federal
highway?
It's
positive
working
relationship
or
do
mostly
let
do
t
do
the
interaction
yeah.
B
C
Thank
you
and
my
final
question.
You
talked
about
pedestrian
safety,
safe
access.
Can
you
also
talk
about?
You
know
how
it
impacts
those
in
the
disability
community.
What
would
it
also
be
safe
access
for
for
the
disabled
and
for
the
elderly
needing
a
little
more
time
to
navigate
the
sidewalks
and
streets
and
in
the
area
generally?
But
you
know
safe
access,
for
everyone
is
important
to
to
me,
but
especially
the
those
in
the
disability
community.
Yes,.
B
Absolutely
the
world
you
see
out
there
today
if
you
were
to
go
through
Sullivan's
Square
on
foot,
poorly
lit,
fast-moving
traffic,
that
is
governed
by
things
like
yield
signs,
but
it
doesn't
always
work
you're,
going
to
go
into
the
future
where
you're
gonna
have
a
grid
of
streets,
a
regular
grid
of
streets
at
every
corner,
there
will
be
traffic
controlled
by
traffic
lights.
Today,
we've
got
one
traffic
signal
around
that
whole
ring
and
it's
just
not
a
safe
situation.
B
B
Also,
major
improvements
for
anybody
running
walking
are
in
a
wheelchair,
going
along
the
whole
cora
de
we're
going
to
have
a
linear
pocket
such
where
there'll
be
a
separate
pedestrian
path
from
a
bicycle
to
a
path
on
the
community
side
and
we'll
also
have
sidewalk
in
a
bicycle.
A
combination
heading
southbound
on
the
call
at
the
industrial
side,
that's
going
through
a
lot
of
renovation.
So,
yes,
I
think
this
will
be
first
great
in
terms
of
access
again.
B
And
if
we
try
to
do
this
whole
thing
as
a
surface
streets,
we'd
be
bringing
all
that
kind
of
traffic
ray
through,
which
is
no
good
for
anybody
on
foot.
Whether
they're
dealing
with
a
handicapped
issue
or
not
so
we're
trying
to
make
the
environment
as
positive
in
Sullivan
Square
and
along
the
length
of
the
whole
car
for
people
of
all
abilities.
B
D
Had
a
couple
questions
about
in
kind
of
the
history
in
the
design
process.
Excuse
me
so
you
had
mentioned
before
that
a
lot
of
what
could
stop
the
funding
that
we're
gonna
get
is,
if
we
don't
march
ahead
and
and
my
I'm
curious
about
how
the
funding
came
about
and
my
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
the
funding
has
been
there
for
some
time.
So
for
for
me,
the
the
question
is:
what's
the
rush,
if
it's
funding
related
or
or
not,
I'm,
particularly
curious
about
that
sure.
B
So
here's
how
it
works
over
at
the
NPO
every
year,
people
get
in
line
and
try
to
line
up
the
funds
for
their
projects
and
we're
gonna
be
entering
that
period
soon,
we're
between
ironically
between
now
and
the
end
of
June,
we'll
be
doing
over
the
tip
every
year.
A
lot
of
projects
get
pushed
back,
push
back
and
push
back
and
they
would
go
year
and
year
after
year
with
delay
because
they're
not
hitting
those
milestones.
B
So
you
can,
you
can
be
in
the
third
year
or
the
fourth
year
or
the
fifth
year
of
a
tip
Transportation
Improvement
Program,
which
is
with
a
table
of
pro
and
never
ever
get
to
use
it.
That's
happened
for
projects
if
you're
making
your
deadlines
when
the
negotiation
comes
up
at
the
table
and
people
are
trying
to
say
hey.
Is
that
project
going
to
be
ready?
B
E
D
I'm,
sorry
to
cut
you
off,
so
it's
been
a
20-year
attempt
to
try
and
get
this
project
done
and
in
that
20
years
there's
been.
There
was
a
surface
option
or
some
version
of
it.
The
work
that
was
going
to
be
the
plan
and
my
understanding
from
your
comments
is
that
it
was
at
the
casino
that
caused
the
city
to
change
their
mind
about
it
know.
B
It
was
a
combination
of
things.
What
happened
was
it
was
because
of
the
casino
in
the
in
the
period
of
time
where
there
was
a
lot
of
ambiguity
as
to
whether
the
casino
would
actually
happen,
and
if
it
did,
where
would
it
happen.
So,
during
that
period
of
time,
this
project
was
put
on
hold
during
that
whole
period.
A
lot
of
things
started
to
change
in
the
environment,
one
after
another
project
started
to
emerge
from
the
back
rooms
into
announced
projects.
B
We
come
up
with
a
list
like
this
of
projects
that
are
being
developed
in
the
area
and
the
implications
of
all
those
projects
in
an
environment
where
we're
trying
to
balance
all
of
nice
things
that
we
want
to
do
for
the
community,
because
it's
we
want
this
to
be
a
project
that
the
community
is
very
happy
with,
but
we
also
know
that
to
make
its
a
success
we
need
to.
We
can't
ignore
the
regional
demands
for
traffic.
B
At
this
point,
we
all
dream
of
that
day
when
everybody
is
taking
a
bus
and
nobody's
driving
in
their
own
personal
cars,
but
we
haven't
got
there
and
we
don't
expect
the
rate
of
you
know
attaining
that
is
coming
fast
enough
to
have
us
say:
let's
keep
our
fingers
crossed
and
build
less
than
the
capacity
that
we
convinced
that
this
project
needs.
So
so
this
this
is
about
economic
development
and
Complete
Streets
and.
B
Public
transit
access
things
like
ad,
a
it's,
it's
about
all
those
things
and
I'll,
just
tell
you
that
one
of
the
latest
enhancements
was
made
to
our
current
working
design
is
to
add
some
dedicated
surface
lanes
for
buses,
and,
what's
ironic
is
as
we
do
that
people
will
say
well
you're,
making
the
street
too
wide.
But
we're
saying
it's
really
critically
important
to
balance
these
things,
because
you
can
see
everything
we
try
to
do,
has
some
implications
for
somebody
and
that's.
D
True
and
I
your
compliment,
I
was
at
the
last
BTD
cut
presentation
on
Sullivan
scores,
specifically
in
the
design
and
I
liked
what
I
saw
in
terms
of
the
community
being
able
to
directly
comment
on
the
plans.
I
thought
that
was
a
really
good
process
on
that
that
component
and
I
woke
I
want
to
give
you
know
credit
where
credit
is
due.
I
do
want
to
just
make
sure
that
I'm
understanding
the
process
and
how
we
got
here.
D
Tell
me
about
the
analysis
between
the
two
different
plans
and
and
thoughts,
yeah
I
understand
why
you
you
just
explained
to
me
due
to
the
boom
economic
boom
and
development.
There
was
a
need
to
maybe
reassess
the
plan.
That
was
there
right,
but
when
you
looked
at
a
specific
analysis
of
the
surface
option,
this
is
the
speed
the
ability
for
cars
to
go
through.
Who
was
that
experts
plan
that
you
were
looking
at
and
and
what?
What
did
that
analysis
so.
B
C
B
B
Would
have
been
back
of
the
envelope
at
the
stage
of
development
where
we
were
with
the
design,
so
it's
kind
of
like
there
are
a
couple
of
sketches
of
a
couple
of
automobiles
you'd
like
to
choose
between,
and
you
haven't,
really
got
a
designed
engineered
car
we're
in
the
process.
Now
of
taking
the
version
that
we're
convinced
is
the
right
one
to
build
and
we're
going
to
continue
to
make
sure
that
we
do
everything
we
can
to
keep
it
on
schedule
and
keep
the
funding
in
place
and.
D
I
do
again
another
thing
I'd
like
to
give
you
guys
credit
for
is
and
I
heard
people
say
this
publicly
about
the
buffer
zones
that
you
increase.
That
space,
though
not
maybe
as
far
as
some
folks
would
like,
but
I,
will
give
credit
where
credit
is
due,
but
I
I
think
in
terms
of
process.
It's
a
little
bit.
D
I
can
understand
why
some
folks
might
be
frustrated
by
the
dismissal
of
a
plan
and
then
saying
that
you've
made
the
best
decision
to
go
forward
with
another
plan
if
there,
if
there
has
not
been
in
depth,
analysis
is,
is
it
that
you've
not
seen?
There's
no
been
no
plan
directly
given
to
you
to
look
at
or
in.
B
B
D
B
We
would
be
needlessly
bringing
on
stress
to
the
system
to
try
to
you
know
and,
and
we've
had
people
ask
us
in
a
number
of
times
from
the
community
to
do
a
full
cost
analysis
of
the
two.
And
it's
like
we're
not
going
to
spend
a
lot
of
time
in
engineering
dollars
costing
out
something
that
we
know
doesn't
work
and.
D
B
B
B
D
And
I
know
this
is
my
final
question
and
I
really
do
appreciate
that
back
and
forth
of
the
of
the
two
options
one
it
seems
like
there
might
be.
If,
for
example,
we
didn't
like
the
tunnel
we're
stuck
with
it,
am
I
correct
if
it,
if,
when
you
redo
the
tunnel,
we're
stuck
with
it,
there's
no
other
option
beyond
the
tunnel.
I
correct
I'm,
it's
one
and
done.
There's
no
well.
B
B
D
D
B
Once
we
build
either
option,
there's
a
desire
on
the
part
of
the
community
to
have
apostles
that
start
to
get
used
and
you
create
a
place
in
Sullivan's
square.
You
can't
just
then
start
redesigning
the
streets
again,
our
adding
an
underpass,
because
if
you're
ever
going
to
wind
up
with
an
underpass,
you
want
to
have
it
wind
up
as
part
of
this.
This
first
go
at
it
because
we
don't
often
get
the
opportunity
to
spend
152
million
of
federal
and
state
dollars
to
do
a
whole
renovation
to
an
area.
B
B
A
You
councillor
Edwards,
okay,
so
I'm
gonna
dig
in
on
my
list
and
then
when
Cal
turf,
SC
returns
we'll
hand
it
over
to
her.
So
I
just
want
to
push
a
little
further
on
the
design
questions,
because
you
know
we're
still
relatively
early
in
the
process
aiming
for
the
25%.
So
there's
still
time
to
have
these
conversations,
I
think
things
really
get
locked
in
the
further
and
further
the
city
gets
into
it.
A
B
Say
just
the
opposite:
the
ability
to
have
through
traffic
under
the
Sullivan
square,
while
somebody
who's
running
down
to
run
an
errand,
see
a
doctor
drop
somebody
off
at
the
MBTA
station,
be
up
at
the
surface
and
not
have
to
deal
with
that
through
traffic
I
think
that's
just
the
opposite
again
think
about
City,
Square
and
think
about
all
the
traffic.
That's
jumping
off
of
93
and
soldiers,
field,
Sullivan,
Sumner,
I'm,
sorry,
so
star
will
drive
and
coming
in
from
levered
circle
all
that
traffic
is
able
to
go
underneath
City
Square,
you
don't
see
it.
B
You
don't
have
to
deal
with
it.
That's
the
kind
of
problem
you'd
be
creating
up
in
Sullivan
square
is,
if
you
said,
let's
let
everybody
who
wants
to
go
through
Sullivan
square
have
to
be
on
the
surface.
You're,
creating
an
environment
now
think
about
this.
This
there's
going
to
be
five
or
six
blocks
in
a
given
direction.
B
B
Regularized
set
of
intersections
places
where
people
can
go
shopping,
people
can
sit
down,
have
a
coffee
on
the
edge
of
the
sidewalk
and
not
have
to
be
dealing
with
the
MBTA
bus.
That's
coming
out
of
the
garage
and
wants
to
go
back
to
Hyde
Park
for
its
route,
any
number
of
vehicles
that
are
coming
over
the
Alfred
Street
Bridge
and
want
to
go
someplace
else
besides
to
Sullivan
square.
It
keeps
them
out
of
people's
hair
in.
A
D
B
A
A
B
B
So
we
have
a
really
good
story.
I
was
I,
guess
fortunate
to
be
selected
to
work
with
the
Environment
Department
when
they
did
the
resiliency
work
and
put
out
this
recent
study,
and
one
of
the
reasons
why
I
was
invited
was
because
I'm
involved
in
this
project
and
one
of
the
outcomes
of
that
for
it
is
that
there
are
two
ways
to
protect
the
underpass
and
the
adjacent
areas
all
the
way
out
to
cambridge
and
somerville.
That
can
flood
through
the
through
one
property
postulate
in
a
little
bit
through
the
adjacent
Brian
playground.
But
the.
B
I'm
trying
to
think
of
the
name
of
the
big
company,
they
are
straps,
I'm,
sorry
sure,
just
out
a
mental
block
there
yeah.
So
we've
worked
with
the
folks
from
strafes
and
we've
worked
with
our
design
and
there's
two
different,
two
different,
a
two
pronged
effort
number
one
we're
building
up
the
profile
of
Main
Street
going
by
the
shafts
property,
and
that's
that
is
the
vulnerable
spot
so
over
by
where
the
fire
station
is
we'll
be
taking
that
Street
and
raising
it
somewhere
between,
like
maybe
well.
B
It
starts
out
at
zero
raising
and
goes
up
to
about
maybe
two
feet
in
some
places
and
we've
looked
at
all
the
adjacent
properties
and
just
by
doing
that,
any
water
that's
coming
through
shafts
will
stay
on
the
other
side
of
Main
Street
on
the
shafts
property,
and
so
that's
built
into
this
project
too.
Additionally,
through
the
good
work
of
the
Environment
Department,
the
folks
at
traps
have
been
enlightened
to
things
that
they
might
want
to
do
in
addition
to
that
along
the
edge
of
the
river.
B
B
The
the
idea
is
that
water
Rises
and
when
it
reaches
a
certain
point
it
can
cross
over
the
Main
Street
today
that
water's
going
to
be
at
that
height,
whatever
it's
going
to
get
to
coming
in
off
the
river.
Just
because
we
say
you
can't
go
past,
Main
Street
doesn't
mean
it
still
would
have
been
at
whatever
height
on
the
rafts
property.
We're
not
creating
a
flooding
situation.
They've
already
got
it.
B
Not
going
to
flood
Cambridge,
Street
I'm,
sorry,
cambridge
and
somerville
in
Charlestown,
because
they
haven't
built
anything
along
the
edge
of
the
river
they're
free
to
do
that
whenever
they
choose.
But
we're
not
going
to
build
this
project
without
taking
the
measures
that
we
can
to
protect
the
community
from
flooding
all.
A
A
So
one
I'm
gonna
ask
one
more
then
hand
over
to
council
Presley
just
in
terms
of
Public
Health.
So
some
of
the
information
that
community
members
and
advocates
have
been
also
raising
is
the
fact
that,
with
with
more
traffic
and
less
of
a
barrier
on
the
underpass
option
versus
the
surface
option,
which
would
have
a
wider
space
for
trees
and
in
a
linear
park,
so
with
the
smaller
less
of
a
barrier
and
the
cars
being
in
some
ways,
more
exposed
as
they're
coming
out
of
the
underpass
and
turning.
A
B
Environment
will
be
building
along
the
entire
length
of
the
car.
There's
going
to
be
a
big
improvement
from
what's
out
there
today
there,
it
has
been
at
a
community
objection
to
the
fact
somebody
put
it
on
the
basis
of
it's
not
equitable,
to
give
somebody
50
feet
of
open
space
next
to
their
property,
and
somebody
else
only
20
when
the
20
didn't
exist
before
and
that's
what
you
can
do,
balancing
all
of
the
other
objectives
and
you're
going
to
have
the
entire
length
of
the
car
door.
B
A
two-way
bike
facility,
the
entire
length
of
the
car
buffered
greenspace,
the
entire
length
of
the
car
to
a
pedestrian
path.
There's
an
ice
off
the
street,
away
from
moving
traffic
place
to
walk
it's
a
major
improvement
and
as
I
quote,
you
could
hear
me-
probably
quote
it
in
a
public
meeting.
This
is
not
a
park
project.
B
This
is
a
transportation
project,
that's
what
the
monies
from,
and
so,
if
somebody
said,
you're
not
being
equitable
on
everybody
getting
the
same
percentage
of
park
space
next
to
their
property,
they
might
have
a
case
if
this
is
what
it
started
out
as.
But
this
is
this
is
one
of
the
extras
that
we're
trying
to
deliver
to
the
community
through
a
transportation
project.
A
A
B
E
Or
there
a
thorough
line
of
questioning
our
relative
to
design
and
impact
and
mitigation.
My
apologies
for
being
tardy,
so
this
may
have
likely
already
been
covered.
So
I
will
watch
the
tape,
but
I
just
had
a
question
in
terms
of
timeline
and
process
mm-hmm,
so
I
just
was
curious
as
to
I
think
the
deadline
for
this
is
June.
Are
there
any
community
meetings
that
are
scheduled
before
that
timeline
before
that
deadline?
Yes,.
B
If
what
you
know,
what
are
the
things
that
people
have
on
their
minds
about
how
the
apostles
in
Sullivan
square
should
work?
How
the
connectivity
of
the
bike
networks
would
best
serve
the
regional
connections
that
people
want
to
have
like,
for
instance,
this
morning
we
were
talking
about
the
piece
that
goes
up.
B
The
Mystic
River
right
before
you
get
to
the
Alpha
Street
bridge,
the
MBTA
is
rebuilding
the
edge
of
the
river
and
then
DC
hours
lining
up
money
to
continue
that
we're
going
to
have
an
outlet
from
our
bicycle
facilities
that
go
through
this
entire
project.
That'll
connect
you
right
into
that,
and
we're
also
connecting
up
to
Somerville
we're
connecting
over
to
Cambridge.
B
You
know
we're
creating
the
points
and
we're
looking
for
anybody
who
has
any
input
that
you
know
tells
us
when
we
missed
something
of
how
we
take
what
we're
building
with
in
this
project
and
making
it
regionally
powerful
we're.
Looking
at
you
know
how
wide
should
the
sidewalks
be
we're
the
people's
envisioned
Civic
space
taking
place
and
all
the
Apostles
we're
going
to
create
and
and
we're
gonna
have
plenty
of
meetings
after
the
25%
submittal.
In
fact,
that's
an
important
point
for
the
the
public.
B
B
So
we
gonna
have
at
least
one
more
meeting
and
in
that
meeting
the
the
content,
I
think
is
gonna,
be
about
an
area
we
spent
the
last
meeting
primarily
up
in
the
Sullivan
Square
area
and
also
over
towards
Raleigh
and
playground,
and
we
are
going
to
come
back
and
do
at
least
you
know.
The
community
needs
to
show
us
what
they
think
about
different
options
for
how
the
linear
park
running
up
from
city
square
up
to
Sullivan's,
where
how
that
should
be
allocated
the
space
allocation.
E
Just
want
to
make
sure
I'm
clear,
so
the
deadline
is
June
and
you'll
at
least
one
more
meeting,
but
the
purpose
of
that
meeting
is
simply
to
talk
about
outstanding
concerns
relative
to
design
specifically
around
advancing
the
underpass.
You
are
no
longer.
My
point
is
you're
no
longer
considering
anything
else,
we're
moving
forward,
and
so
what
is
happening
at
this
meeting?
Yes,.
B
E
B
E
E
Let
me
go
back
some
other
questions
just
again:
I
apologize.
These
things
have
already
been
asked
and
answered
just
in
terms
of
cost,
so
I
wanted
to
make
sure
I
understand
all
the
funding
mechanisms
here.
So
you
have
a
large
sum
of
money.
Coming
from
the
city
of
Boston,
you
have
capital
dollars
that
are
coming
from.
When
is
there
a
contingency
plan
if
this
is
their
license,
their
gaming
license.
B
The
money
that
were
currently
lined
up
to
use
for
this
project
is
not
wins:
money.
It's
state
and
federal
dollars.
Totaling
152
million
now
should
wins.
Money
come
in
to
us.
We'll
have
the
opportunity
to
do
some
enhancements,
maybe
beyond
the
current
project
and
as
any
as
any
of
you
who
have
been
around
government
well
know.
When
you're
at
higher
and
higher
levels
of
refinement
of
your
plan,
your
number
becomes
more
and
more
meaningful.
How
much
it's
going
to
cost
can.
E
B
Some
some
of
those
numbers
become
clearer
as
you
get
further
into
design.
In
other
words,
if
you
start
with
a
concept
which
is
just
a
nice
graphic
of
you
know:
hey
there's
no
tunnel,
there's
a
tunnel
that
doesn't
give
you
nearly
enough
information
to
start
getting
it.
So
so
we
passed
that
concept
level
and
to
have
meaningful
numbers
beyond
the
ones
we
have
now
the
ones
we
have
now
are
good
numbers,
but
probably
subject
to
refinement
as
we
go
along.
E
B
A
I
just
want
to
follow
up
on
one
question
from
councillor
Presley's
line
of
questioning
and
then
I
know.
We
have
some
folks
who
wish
to
testify
too
so
Jim.
Just
going
back
to
your.
You
know
comparison
of
the
surface
versus
underpass
option
before
you
made
the
decision
to
abandon
the
surface
option,
so
the
evaluation
at
that
point
was
underpass
versus
was
it?
Was
it
a
five
lane
surface
option
the.
A
B
A
B
A
A
B
A
Well,
I
would
love
to
speak
more
offline
about
how
some
of
these
line
up
with
the
the
report
that
we've
been
given
I
think
you,
you
must
know.
Professor
Firth
had
helped
advise
the
council
on
our
transportation
policy
briefing
series
over
the
last
year,
so
we
know
him
well
and
he
you
know
know
he
knows
his
stuff
and
I.
Think.
As
councilor
Pressley
pointed
out,
it
seems
like
we're
approaching
a
really
critical
juncture
for
locking
in
all
the
details
before
the
next
public
meeting,
in
cetera.
Well.
A
B
A
A
Hear
that
I
just
want
to
make
sure
the
public
has
a
chance
to
hear
your
feedback
in
your
reaction
to
a
potential
alternative
that
I
don't
know
it
sounds
like
may
or
may
not
have
been
discussed
earlier,
and
you
know
being
mindful
of
wanting
to
make
sure
the
city
keeps
its
place
in
the
queue
relative
to
other
projects
that
want
to
be
funded.
We
also
are
asking
for
a
little.
A
A
F
Thank
you
very
much,
councillor
Flynn
and
Ayane.
Thank
you,
I
think
your
questions
have
been
very,
very
well
put
and
we're
very
grateful
for
your
curiosity.
You
have
the
letter
I'm
just
going
to
read
the
letter
and
then
a
memo
will
speak
dear
chairperson
wu
and
the
members
of
the
Planning
and
Development
Transportation.
For
me,
we
understand
that
the
committee
will
be
considering
authorizing
the
acceptance
of
250,000
dollars
in
grant
funds
from
the
Massachusetts
Gaming
Commission
to
fund
a
portion
of
the
design
cause
for
Rutherford,
Avenue
and
Sullivan
square
project.
F
We
urge
the
committee
to
delay
acceptance
of
the
funds
until
a
number
of
key
questions
are
answered
and
community
concerns
are
addressed.
The
Rutherford
Carter
Improvement
Coalition
has
been
in
existence
in
Charlestown
working
on
this
project
since
2010
I
would
add
here
that
for
many
of
us
who
have
lived
in
Charlestown
a
long
time,
the
planning
on
this
corridor
has
gone
back
to
the
middle
90s
too.
F
We
had
a
whole
process
in
the
middle
90s
that,
unfortunately,
did
not
get
implemented
so
we're
back
to
square
one.
Our
goal
throughout
this
process
has
been
to
work
with
the
city
to
craft,
a
plan
that
maximizes
benefits
for
the
neighborhood
city
of
Boston.
The
region
and
minimizes
cost
minimizes
cost,
including
dollars
and
negative
impacts.
F
We
understand
the
Boston
Transportation
Department
is
indicating
there
is
some
level
of
urgency
about
the
project
now,
but
the
truth
is
that
there
is
only
one
opportunity
to
get
this
project
right
and
with
an
anticipated
public
investment
of
well
over
160
million
dollars.
The
160
million
dollars
was
quoted
by
mr.
Gillooly
at
the
public
meeting
on
January
24th.
F
We
strongly
believe
that
all
avenues
must
be
explored
to
ensure
a
design
that
offers
the
best
outcomes
and
it's
the
one
that
is
ultimately
built.
As
you
were
aware,
in
2013,
the
city
decided
to
proceed
with
the
surface
design
that
removed
the
existing
underpasses
at
Austin,
Street
and
solan
Square
and
rebuilt
the
roadway
from
North
Washington
Street
Bridge
to
the
Alfred
Street
bridge,
leading
to
effort.
This
was
reopened
by
BTD
late
in
2016
to
analyze
the
potential
traffic
impacts
from
the
wind
casino
in
November
2017.
F
After
essentially
no
community
project
process,
BTD
announced
the
city
had
changed
its
position
and
selected
a
design
that
rebuilt
the
two
underpasses
as
the
preferred
concept.
Despite
significant
opposition,
we
have
communicated
with
city
officials
the
lower
Mystic
Regional
Planning
Group
in
the
Boston
MTO
and
wonderful
occasions.
Please
find
background
materials
and
correspondence
attached
to
this
letter
among
the
questions
and
concerns
that
remain
unaddressed.
Our
the
following
in
the
most
recent
process,
vgg
did
not
sincerely
explore
the
surface
option.
F
In
fact,
although
the
department
has
insisted
that
the
surface
design
is
not
possible,
professor
Peter
Firth
of
Northeastern
University
has
proven
that
not
only
is
the
surface
design
possible
at
Austin
Street,
but
that
the
HEC
euler
movements
would
be
better
served
and
in
the
city's
preferred
underpass
design.
He
also
found
multiple
aspects
of
the
underpass
design
to
be
unsafe
for
pedestrians
and
in
violation
of
mat
of
MassDOT.
Please
see
it
like
attachment.
B.
From
the
neighborhood
perspective,
the
difference
between
the
two
is
dramatic
21
feet
of
open
space.
F
It
is
important
to
note
that
professor
first
used
exactly
the
same
traffic
count
and
traffic
growth
assumptions
in
his
analysis
that
bgd
had
used
his
findings
on
Austin
Street
call
into
question
BTS
analysis
at
Sullivan
Square
as
well.
Btd
has
never
shown
the
community
its
estimates
for
cost
of
design
and
construction
of
the
underpass
design
and
has
not
compared
it
to
the
cost
of
the
surface
design.
The
same
is
true
for
ongoing
maintenance
costs
of
both.
F
Often,
we
are
not
aware
of
any
Boston
transportation
design
process
that
did
not
make
cost
information
available
to
the
public
during
the
community
process
in
the
past,
and
we
are
very
concerned
that
the
construction
cost
differential
may
be
in
the
tens
of
millions
of
dollars
of
ongoing
maintenance
costs
are
likely
to
be
likely
to
be
higher
with
an
underpass
them
without
the
existence
of
an
underpass
at
Sullivan.
Square
negatively
affects
the
development
potential
of
the
area.
F
Not
only
does
this
reduce
the
potential
for
local
jobs
and
housing,
it
affects
the
city's
revenues
that
would
be
generated
through
future
property
taxes.
Last
month,
the
Charles
Town
neighborhood
experienced
flooding
beyond
along
the
waterfront
and
in
the
Navy
Yard,
and
at
Baldwin
Street.
The
entire
project
areas
built
unfilled
and
is
subject
to
increase.
Increased
flooding
due
to
sea
level
rise.
Constructing
under
passes
in
such
a
location
is
not
consistent
with
the
city's
goals
for
climate
resiliency
and
could
put
drivers
and
public
safety
personnel
at
risk
in
the
future.
F
Btd
never
publicly
compared
the
two
alternatives
as
they
relate
to
the
stated
goals.
Those
goals
include
improving
pedestrian
connections,
safety
to
the
T
stations,
creating
public,
open
space,
providing
opportunities
for
appropriate
development,
among
others.
If
such
a
comparison
were
released,
we
believe
the
surface
design
would
be
better
in
all
those
goals.
We
appreciate
very
much
the
opportunity
to
appear
before
the
committee
at
a
future
date
and
offer
more
extensive
testimony
regarding
this
project
and
the
technical
analysis
performed
by
Northeastern
University.
We
respectfully
request
that
you
delay
the
authorization
of
additional
funding
until
such
a
time.
F
A
F
A
F
Would
like
to
point
out
that
this
raft
building
is,
is
not
the
company
that
owns
its
the
Flatley
company
and
they
own
from
the
shafts
building
all
the
way
down
to
the
Lafarge
property.
It's
a
very
large
piece
of
property
and
the
city's
raising
of
the
intersection
of
Main,
Street,
Medford,
Street
and
Bunker
Hill
Street
does
trap
any
flooding
on
the
Flatley
property.
It
does
not
allow
it
to
drain
effectively.
G
Yeah
am
I
Yash
I
live
at
41
Union
Street
in
Charlestown,
for
those
of
you
not
familiar.
That
is
right
near
the
Austin
Street
intersection
that
Peter
Firth
developed
that
design.
For.
Thank
you
all
for
your
time
and
for
your
questions.
It
showed
to
me
that
you
are
paying
attention
and
that
you're
listening
to
the
concerns
the
community
has
raised.
G
G
The
last
thing
I
would
want
is
for
the
city
to
not
accept
funds
from
the
Gaming
Commission,
because
this
is
an
area
that
needs
to
be
studied
and
needs
further
design
work.
But
I
would
appreciate
this
council
in
this
committee.
Asking
tough
questions
about
you
know
what
exactly
might
throw
us
off
of
that
timeline.
I
I
questioned
that
spending
a
little
additional
time,
particularly
to
review
the
design
that
Professor
Firth
has
suggested.
I
questioned
that
that
really
threatens
funding
from
the
MPO.
That's
been
on
the
books
for
a
while
I
I.
G
Imagine
this
kind
of
thing
happens
with
transportation
projects.
All
the
time
they're
constantly
in
flux
and
that
the
MPO
would
understand
that,
so
you
know
I
think
I
certainly
would
appreciate
some
sort
of
hearing,
or
you
know,
opportunity
for
the
public
to
comment.
Some
sort
of
you
know
true
analysis
of
what
what
Professor
for
Firth
has
put
forward,
because
it
is
to
me
a
viable
option
that,
albeit
with
more
traffic
lanes,
because
excuse
me,
because
the
underpasses
are
such
an
inefficient
use
of
space
with
those
more
traffic
lanes
to
carry
more
vehicular
capacity.