Public Documents

Disclaimer: In an effort to foster a better informed citizenry , EBOL provides these documents in electronic form as a public service. East Boston OnLine bears no responsibility for typographical errors. Contact the document writers for hard copies. Some documents have been scanned using an Apple Scanner and OmniPage OCR software. Others have been obtained through e-mail and cut and pasted here. And others have been typed manually. Please send comments and suggestions to editor@eastboston.com

MEETING NOTES

East Boston Greenway Coordinating Council
Harborside Community Center, Conference Room
Monday, January 25, 1999

map of the Marginal to Prescott Segment of the Greeenway
Click to see full map of proposed Greenway

Attending: Carolyn Banulis, Eva Bisceglia, Valerie Burns, Connie Carbone, Rose D'Amore, Florence D'Avella, Edith DeAngelis, Police Officer Robin DeMarco, Lucy and William Ferullo, Lory Henning, Nancy Kafka, Karen Maddelena, Pamela Smith, Mark Warren, Lauri Webster, Mary Ellen Welch, Joanne Zambuto.

After introductions, Nancy Kafka surprised everyone:

1. Nancy Kafka (TPL)

Nancy presented ceremonial railroad spikes to members of the Greenway Council. They are the same as the ones presented to the dignitaries at the groundbreaking. Everyone was thrilled and thought the spikes were such a clever idea. Thank you very much Nancy!

2. Lila Wallace - Reader's Digest Fund

BNAF received some very good news today. We were notified that the Lila Wallace Readers Digest Fund - Urban Parks Initiative will be supporting BNAF's work on the East Boston Greenway and the Neponset River Greenway with $415,000 (for both Greenways) over the next three years. BNAF must raise a dollar for dollar match. BNAF thanked the Council for its letters of support, which make a big difference to evaluators. Council members congratulated BNAF for putting together a winning proposal.

As a result of the grant, we will be able to develop our Greenway Gameplan for 1999. We will be focusing on management (maintenance, security and programming). As every one knows we do not have an ownership entity; none of our partners have stepped up to be the owner of the Greenway. We will need some help and have some funding for consultants to help create the management plan. As part of this effort we will be exploring how the standard of maintenance and security at Piers Park gets applied to the Greenway. A Council member emphasized the importance of effective security for the Greenway.

On the subject of raising a match, a Council member thought she had seen in the newspaper a February deadline for East Boston Foundation grant applications. BNAF will check it out.

3. Greenway - Conrail Corridor/Bremen Street Park

Our next agenda item presents a serious set of circumstances. The Greenway Council has been advocating for the land transfer to occur since we began; officials have come to an agreement, based on a 1992 MOU, which was presented at the CA/T meeting on January 20, 1999. The agreement apparently pairs something good -- the removal of Park Ex (alias Park 'n Fly) off the Bremen Street site with something that at this point does not look so good -- the placement of Park Ex in the Southwest Service Area near the neighborhood. Bremen Street Park can now go forward, but the resolution has created a whole new set of issues.

One Council member voiced a complaint that the officials involved had left the community out of the decision making process. Then she went on to say that the proximity of the new location to the neighborhood is unacceptable and there needs to be a much better buffer. She stated that the Greenway Council should remain neutral until Massport meets with the community.

nother Council member said that there is a meeting of subcommittees (Jeffries Point Neighborhood Association, Gove Street Neighborhood Association, Air Inc.) on February 2 at 7 at One Harborside Drive. This is not a public meeting, but a meeting to prepare for a public meeting.

With respect to this pre-meeting (this "working group"), a Council member respectfully registered her opposition to this method of doing business in East Boston. It only makes it easier to divide and conquer the community. There may be problems with open meetings but they can be managed. We all live in East Boston and all deserve to be involved. With respect to the land swap, she echoed her agreement that the Greenway Council needs to be neutral.

Yet another Council member voiced her opinion that Mike Lewis is holding the Bremen Street (BSP) park as hostage -- that if we want it we must accept things we do not want. She also agreed the Council should stay neutral.

Another Council member thought the Greenway Council should remain neutral -- that EB should speak with one voice. She was disgusted with Massport, saying they throw out crumbs to the community and then stab us in the back. She, along with others, would like to see Amerena Park/Field returned to the community.

She also noted what others stated at the January 20th meeting: that neighborhood people are getting creamed with ground tremors, jet fuel in their mouths and now Runway 14-32 looms. Looking in retrospect, it was easy for her to see why the airport was anxious to get the airport edge program going -- it was so they could have something in the ground before this (14-32) announcement.

Speaking of 14-32, a Council member reported that she went to the protest organized by people in Winthrop. It was well organized and effective. Massport continues to meet with bits and pieces of the community. We don't even know what show they give to the vast majority. Its much easier for them to manage small meetings. Alot of how we feel, Winthrop feels the same. Massport has to have limits to its growth. It can move some of its operations. Let's get the big picture, not one street or one buffer zone at a time.

To follow-up on this issue, a Council member announced that there was an Airport Community Advisory Committee meeting on February 4th and the Airside Review Committee on February 11. She also explained that the litigants to depress the artery in East Boston from the tunnel portals to the Park know that the City officials don't like it so much but believe that it would be the best thing for East Boston. As designed now, any future depression of this part of the highway would require taking part of the Bremen Street Park for the highway ramp. If litigants win, it will be a win for everyone. If they lose we will be back where we started.

Valerie summed up what she thought and offered some of her thoughts: The Council wishes to remain neutral at this time on the issue of the land swap. It is good that Massport is starting to meet with affected people. At some point in April or May, the CA/T project will issue a Notice of Project Change and the Greenway Council will have to take a position. There is time to rework and enlarge the buffer between Park Ex to the satisfaction of the neighbors. 75% design documents for the highway contract are due in mid February. 100% documents will be submitted this summer and the project is scheduled to go out to bid in August of 99 (as far as we know).

Its very important to keep Bremen Street Park as separate and unlinked to any kind of mitigation for Runway 14-32. This park is mitigation for the tunnel its traffic impacts.

The Council finished up this agenda item with a bit of discussion on protecting the Bremen Street Park, once built. One of the issues we will address over the next year is the permanent ownership of the Greenway. On Piers Park, the ownership was known at the outset. Massport owns Piers Park and it does not have any protections that parks have (4f under federal law and Article 97 under state law, although 2/3 vote of legislature can lift article 97). We must ensure that Bremen Street park is a protected park and that it can not in any way revert to Massport.

4. Greenway - From Prescott Street to Frankfort

Valerie passed out a few copies and some xerox copies of the East Boston Access Plan. The access plan addresses design guidelines, including pathway widths, for the Greenway. At the January 20th meeting, the CA/T team presented a design for the connection from Prescott to Frankfort, but it was at the end of a very contentious meeting, where the land swap was first on the agenda. The design did not get all the attention it needed by the community.

This extension of the Greenway will be built by the CA/T project in exchange for the foot bridge ( a deal that the city struck). The CA/T project also has to use this narrow strip for truck access during highway/park construction. The strip is fairly narrow and is wet. The CA/T maintains it is within the 100 year flood plain although there is another engineering opinion that it is a coastal area and may not necessarily be subject to the requirement to balance cut and fill as the project has maintained.

The extension will be fully landscaped and fully lit with Van Buren fixture. The bikeway is coming out on a different place than expected on Frankfort Street, due to the truck route (which has not been designed yet). The project has proposed an 8'/10' wide walkway/bikeway with what appears to be a 0 to 2' shoulder. The guidelines in the EB Access Plan call for an 8'/10' walkway/bikeway (as a minimum ) with 6' shoulders. This is one issue with the design.

he second issue is the grading of the path and whether is gets as low as existing grade (103). If it does it may flood frequently. Is this acceptable? Although there is not sufficient information presented on this drawing, the section shows the road at about elevation 115, the path at 107 and the wet area at 101. This is the second issue. The third issue has to do with wall behind the parking lot, which is in terrible condition and unsightly.

After some discussion, the Council decided to give the following feedback to the CA/T:

* paths should be wider and shoulders should be 6Õ minimum, both sides.

* path should be designed (including drainage system) to be passable all year round (Council thinks management should include plowing this so people will be able to use it as they used the pedestrian bridge).

* the design should accommodate splashing and spill over from the highway

* the path should not come so close to the highway (one Council member suggested the designer reverse the curve near Prescott to get the bikeway from being so close to the highway)

* design the under viaduct area

*address the crib wall (who's property is it on?) and provide further information on the concrete retaining wall.

5. Updates

Greenway - Conrail Corridor from Marginal to Porter Street - We are very disappointed to report that, with respect to the start of actual construction, there is still no Notice to Proceed or signed contract from MHD for the first section of the Greenway, from Marginal to Porter Street. It appears the project is tied up with 80 other projects state wide that are not moving forward; the rumor is that the Big Dig is placing a strain on the state budget.

Commissioner Liff has told the Mayor that the several Boston projects being managed by MHD are not moving forward (projects in East Boston, Jamaica Plain and the Fenway) and cabinet head Andrea D'Amato knows too. The Council asked Valerie to write a letter to our very successful Senator Travaglini, now House Whip. People also wanted to know what the time frame was before bids are void.

In the mean time, Ken Crasco is working to get the second grant going. The second ISTEA grant has been approved and Ken hopes to see a notice to proceed in about six weeks.

CAT Airport Station - Attendance is very low. It is still disturbing that there will be no personnel on community side.

Bayswater - Bayswater is moving forward. Schemes presented at January meeting were simple.

BNAF comments on the BRA Master Plan - Valerie passed out letter she had written to Jansi Chandler of the BRA regarding the masterplan alternatives. Comments specifically address the Greenway, and include the greenway route, the truck route, the police station and the Condor Street urban Wild. Since the Council had not discussed the Master plan alternatives, Valerie wrote the comments from her perspective and not on behalf of the Council. If Council members have any further comments, we should discuss them.

Several Council members commented that although the first master plan workshop had been a success, the second workshop was not. People were supposed to listen to a presentation on the alternatives and vote. The BRA did not want public discussion. The information the BRA had sent out in advance in black and white was not effective. A group of people that had not attended any of the previous meetings marched in and cast their vote for alternative number 1. The consultants several times insulted the community with their remarks that this method had worked elsewhere. Luckily the powers that be decided to extend the comment period and people could send in written comments. It appears the BRA is going back to the original meeting format, which is a good thing.

At the last PCG meeting there was a presentation by the BHA (mostly on Maverick Gardens) and the Winn group who hopes to develop 380 market rate apartments on the waterfront.

6. Other Business

Amelia Earhart did not land in East Boston in January 14 because of the snow storm. She has rescheduled her visit for March 25th. Come to the East Boston Branch Library on at 6:30 pm to meet her! One Council member suggested we have the program at Landfall Apartments or West Shore Plaza and not the library, which is not so accessible. BNAF will talk to library personnel in advance to make sure it is accessible.

Valerie passed out a schedule of winter programs. Please come!

END.

ccmn199

These notes are written to the best recollection of the authors. Please let BNAF know if corrections are necessary within 60 days of the date of the meeting notes. Contact BNAF@aol.com

BOSTON NATURAL AREAS FUND. INC.(BNAF)
59 Temple Place, Room 558
Boston, MA 02111-1307
(617)542-7696
(Fax)542-0383
e-mail: BNAF@aol.com