MassDOT Comments on Wynn & MEPA

Ten Park Plaza, Suite 4150, Boston, MA 02116 Tel: 857-368-4636, TTY: 857-368-0655

www.mass.gov/massdot Leading the Nation in Transportation Excellence

MEMORANDUM

TO: David Mohler, Executive Director Office of Transportation Planning FROM: J. Lionel Lucien, P.E, Manager, Public/Private Development Unit Office of Transportation Planning DATE: August 21, 2015 SUBJECT: Everett – Wynn Casino Resort: SSFEIR

(EEA#15060)

The Public/Private Development Unit has reviewed the Second Supplemental Final

Environmental Impact Report (SSFEIR) for the Wynn Casino project in Everett. The proposed project entails the development of a 2.6 million square-foot (sf) resort casino to be located on the west side of Route 99 (Broadway), opposite Mystic Street. The project site comprises approximately 33.9 acres of land in the City of Everett, adjacent to the Mystic River. The project is bounded to the west by the tracks of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA); to the north by the MBTA’s Everett Shops Facility; to the east by Route 99, an existing carwash, and the Massachusetts Water Resource Authority (MWRA) and the Boston Water & Sewer Commission Treatment Plant facility; and to the south by the Mystic River.

Primary access to the site will be provided via a new signalized intersection on Route 99

on land acquired from the MBTA. A secondary access for deliveries and employees will be provided via a service road that would follow the periphery of the MBTA Everett Shops property and connect with Route 99 across from Beacham Street in Everett. On April 3, 2015, the Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs issued a Certificate in response to the SFEIR filed on February 25, 2015, finding the project not in compliance with MEPA regulations. An SSFEIR was required to address the following transportation issues:

A) An explanation of and remedy for the premature conveyance of land from the MBTA to the Proponent prior to the completion of MEPA review;

B) A commitment to a specific dollar amount for an annual operating subsidy to the MBTA to support service and capacity improvements on the Orange Line;

C) The establishment of a process for long-term improvements along the Rutherford Avenue Corridor and at Sullivan Square; and

D) An update of the transportation analysis/mitigation commitment/Section 61 Findings. MassDOT has thoroughly reviewed the updated transportation study included in the

SSFEIR, and during the process and has met for discussions with the Proponent, the Cities of Boston, Somerville, and Everett and other stakeholders involved with the approval of the project.

Everett – Wynn Casino Resort 8/21/15

It is our opinion that the SSFEIR has adequately addressed the issues raised in the MEPA Certificate and presented a comprehensive mitigation program to address the project’s traffic impacts. MassDOT shares some of the City of Boston’s concerns regarding the effectiveness of the interim mitigation plan to address the existing deficiencies at Sullivan Square due to its proximity to the I-93 southbound ramp. However, we believe with the City of Boston’s cooperation, the willingness of the Proponent to acquire right-of-way as appropriate, and discussions and inputs from technical staff involved in the permitting process, this plan can be refined and finalized to address the remaining concerns. MassDOT will continue to work with the Proponent, the City of Boston and other interested stakeholders to ensure that the interim mitigation plan is further refined and the right-of-way issues are addressed prior to the issuance of MassDOT’s Section 61 Findings. Further, as explained below, MassDOT stands ready to continue working with these same stakeholders to address longer-term mitigation issues that may arise out of the proposed reconfiguration of Rutherford Avenue and Sullivan Square.

Accordingly, MassDOT believes that the SSFEIR has adequately addressed the key

transportation issues raised in the SSFEIR Certificate and supports issuance of a certificate finding the SSFEIR to be adequate. We believe that no further environmental review need be required based on transportation issues and that remaining issues can and will be addressed through the permitting process and finalization of Section 61 findings.

The following comments addresses in more details MassDOT’s review of the SSFEIR.

A. Land Conveyance As noted in our comment letter on the SFEIR, MassDOT/MBTA inappropriately

executed a deed of sale for land associated with the Wynn Everett Casino while the project was still in the MEPA process. The decision to require an SSFEIR ensured that MassDOT/MBTA could work with the Proponent to fashion an appropriate remedy for that action and required the Proponent to publicly document all analysis undertaken to ensure that the transfer of land would not adversely affect the operations of the MBTA Everett Shops.

As explained in the SSFEIR, the Proponent has worked with the MBTA to place the subject property and the payment received for it into escrow. The escrow agreement provides that the conveyance of the property shall be deemed to not have taken place unless and until the Secretary of EOEA has issued a certificate finding the project adequate. If based upon the Final MEPA Certificate, the MBTA determines that no changes are needed to the prior sale, the parties will break escrow and the transfer will be finalized. If the MEPA certificate requires modifications to the original transfer, the parties will ensure that all regulatory conditions are incorporated before any land transfer is finalized.

The SSFEIR also documents the impact of the land transfer on the operations of the

Everett Shops. During the land disposition process, the Proponent consulted with MBTA staff, including the staff of the Everett Shops to ensure that the transaction would not negatively impact operations. With input from technical and operational staff, the Proponent was able to


demonstrate that the modifications resulting from the land transfer would not be detrimental to MBTA operations on the site.

B. Orange Line Subsidy During the MEPA review of this project, MassDOT consistently requested that the

Proponent provide an operating subsidy for additional Orange Line service. Throughout the process, MassDOT and the Proponent engaged in discussions on this issue, but no commitment was made up through and including in the SFEIR. In our comment letter requesting an SSFEIR, MassDOT again requested that the Proponent be scoped to continue working out this issue.

The Proponent is expecting significant usage of the MBTA transit system by both patrons

and employees traveling to the site. The SSFEIR includes an updated analysis of projected Orange Line peak loads for weekday and weekend service days between the Wellington and Back Bay Stations. Based on these projections, the increase in demand would add a significant number of employees and casino patrons in the transit system during some peak periods.

As discussed in the SSFEIR, MassDOT requested the Proponent to mitigate transit

impacts in a manner analogous to the way that project proponent mitigate traffic impacts on roadway network - by funding the provision of additional operational capacity to offset any deterioration in service caused by the project. In the case of the Orange Line, the proposed mitigation approach is to fund additional service in any case where the level of service in the Build Condition is projected to be below the level of service in the No Build Condition, unless the Orange Line has existing capacity to handle the increased trips.

As reflected in the SSFEIR, there are four times of the week, where the Orange Line is

projected to violate MBTA service quality standards in the Build Condition and the annual cost to run additional service to mitigate this condition is $382,200. The revenue that is assumed for this service based upon the additional passengers added to the Orange Line by Wynn customers and/or employees is $110,500 annually, requiring an annual subsidy of $271,700. In addition, in order to encourage transit mode share during late night service hours, the Proponent has agreed to subsidize additional service beyond the required mitigation. That service will provide reduced headways during weekday evenings (9:00 to 11:00) at a cost of $109,200, for a total annual Orange Line subsidy of $380,900 (2015 dollars). The Proponent has agreed to annually inflate this subsidy by 2.5% and to commit to a term of 15 years. The total subsidy over the 15-year period will be $7.4 million. MassDOT and the MBTA have engaged with the Proponent in reaching agreement on this subsidy structure and amount. We are now confident that the subsidy would not only mitigate the transit impacts of the project but would help improve quality of service on the Orange Line. MassDOT and the MBTA therefore support the transit mitigation subsidy as laid out in the SSFEIR.


C. Rutherford Avenue Improvement Planning Process

Over the course to the MEPA review, the City of Boston, along with other commenters, expressed concerns regarding the incompatibility of the Wynn Casino with the City’s long-term goals for both Sullivan Square and the Rutherford Avenue corridor. According to preliminary conceptual plans resulting from a visioning process by the City of Boston, the Rutherford Avenue corridor is expected to be reduced to two lanes in each direction with pedestrian and bicycle facilities provided on both sides. Sullivan Square, the northern terminus of Rutherford Avenue in the City of Boston, is expected to be redeveloped into a network of neighborhood and pedestrian-friendly streets to accommodate denser land use that would connect to the existing Charlestown neighborhood.

In our comment letter on the SFEIR, MassDOT requested that the SSFEIR scope include

the development of a planning process for the integration of the City’s long-term plans for Sullivan Square and Rutherford Avenue and the impacts of casino traffic. In the Certificate on the SFEIR, the Secretary of EEA called for the development of a planning process with participation by MassDOT, the Massachusetts Gaming Commission (MGC), the Proponent and the City. On June 1st, MassDOT convened a group of stakeholders to begin the process. Parties in attendance included the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, the MGC, Wynn, the City of Somerville and the City of Everett. The City of Boston, though invited, opted not to attend.

A second meeting called by the Secretary of Transportation on August 13th was attended

by the MGC, Wynn and representatives of the cities of Boston, Everett and Somerville. At the meeting, the City of Boston presented an overview of the existing problems at Sullivan Square and discussed their extensive efforts to develop plans in conjunction with the Charlestown neighborhood to reconfigure Sullivan Square and the Rutherford Avenue corridor. They expressed strong reservations regarding the ability of the mitigation plan proposed by the Wynn Casino Resort Proponent to address the project’s traffic impacts at Sullivan Square. In addition, they argue that the Wynn Casino Resort mitigation plan is incompatible with the City of Boston vision for Sullivan Square and Rutherford Avenue. Similarly, the City of Somerville expressed concerns that the additional traffic associated with the casino at Sullivan Square and along Rutherford Avenue would inhibit future growth planned in Somerville, more specifically at Union Square and at Assembly Row. On the other hand, the City of Everett expressed their support for the Wynn Casino project mitigation plan and viewed the project as a catalyst for economic development and future growth. The August 13 meeting, while it did not resolve the outstanding issues, was productive and allowed MassDOT to ensure that we understand all of the parties’ concerns with respect to both interim and long-term mitigation. Having held these two meetings, MassDOT believes we have fulfilled the requirement in the SFEIR Certificate to initiate a planning process to address the transportation concerns at Sullivan Square and Rutherford Avenue.

What is clear from the meeting and from subsequent review of material provided by the

City of Boston is that there are two distinct time periods that must be considered with respect to mitigating the project’s impacts on Rutherford Avenue and Sullivan Square. The first is an


“interim period” during which those roadways will remain roughly in their current configuration; the second is a “future condition” in which Rutherford Avenue and Sullivan Square have been reconfigured. While many people believe that the Sullivan Square redesign is a done deal, the City’s process to date has not produced a design for this important project that is sufficiently detailed that it can be thoroughly evaluated by MassDOT and the public. MassDOT supports the City’s efforts to advance its ideas for the future of Rutherford Avenue and Sullivan Square and in July 2014 executed an agreement with the City of Boston to fund the 25% design plans using a federal earmark. While that effort is progressing, until the design is advanced MassDOT cannot provide detailed feedback on the proposed redesign or hold required public hearings. MassDOT’s understanding is that the City of Boston plans to begin actual construction in 2020, assuming of course that the proposed design works and funding can be obtained. Therefore, the interim time period is likely to encompass the opening of the Wynn casino.

Thus, while the City of Boston has a compelling vision for the future of Rutherford

Avenue and Sullivan Square, it does not yet have a “project” that has been designed. For reasons of both fairness and efficiency, the MEPA process and MassDOT’s traffic analysis guidelines require each project proponent to account for all other private and public projects that precede it; projects for which a MEPA filing has occurred are required to be taken into account in the traffic analysis for all subsequent filers that affect the same area of the transportation network. But the City of Boston has not initiated state or federal environmental review for its Rutherford Avenue and Sullivan Square redesign and cannot do so until the design process has advanced. Nor has MassDOT been provided with sufficiently detailed design to be able to evaluate the project or model its impacts on the regional transportation network.

MassDOT believes the SSFEIR has adequately addressed the key transportation issues

during the interim period while Rutherford Avenue and Sullivan Square remain in roughly their current configuration. As stated above, we believe that remaining traffic issues for this timeframe can be addressed through the permitting process and finalization of Section 61 findings. MassDOT will of course consider the comments filed by all stakeholders including the Cities of Boston and Somerville in the development of the Section 61 Finding for the project.

The question remains of how best to continue the process for planning long-term

improvements along the Rutherford Avenue Corridor and at Sullivan Square and for evaluating the impacts of the Wynn casino and other planned development projects on traffic in this important location. MassDOT is ready either to convene or participate in such an effort. Indeed, we believe that such a regional working group could address all of the transportation issues associated with the impact of the casino and other planned development on future conditions in the area of Rutherford Avenue and Sullivan Square. Any such effort could be informed by ongoing efforts at MassDOT and the MBTA to conduct technical analyses of the future conditions for that area as they are impacted by the plans for Rutherford Avenue and Sullivan Square as well as the Green Line Extension project, the reimagining of McGrath Boulevard and planned private development in nearby communities. MassDOT would be happy to work with others to refine the models developed for those efforts in order to inform the work of the regional working group.


Perhaps the MEPA certificate on the SSFEIR could acknowledge the need for such a process and even tie it to the development of a long-term mitigation plan that would in turn unlock the $25 million in funding that Wynn has set aside for making longer-term improvements to Sullivan Square. Such a process for developing a long-term mitigation plan for Rutherford Avenue and Sullivan Square could, of course, involve noticing the availability of a draft version of the plan in the MEPA Monitor so that appropriate public review and comment could be ensured even after the MEPA process for the Wynn casino comes to an end.

D. Mitigation/Draft Section 61 Finding The SSFEIR includes an updated transportation study that conforms to

MassDOT/EOEEA’s Transportation Impact Assessment Guidelines (2014). The transportation study has revisited capacity analyses for several intersections within the study area following comments received from abutters or local communities. For the most past, the analysis was required to address some revisions to the trip distribution or corrections of some inaccuracies in graphics included in the previous submissions.

The SSFEIR includes updated Levels of Service (LOS) and a summary of the 50th and

95th percentile vehicle queues for these intersections as appropriate. In addition, the Proponent has adequately addressed questions regarding the use of SYNCHRO traffic software and the VISSIM simulation model used to verify the mitigation plan performance measures. Throughout the process, the Proponent has worked with the MassDOT Traffic Operations unit to ensure that information used to conduct both capacity analysis and traffic simulation were reviewed, calibrated, and validated. MassDOT remains confident that the analysis and the traffic simulation provided accurately portray existing and future operating conditions within the study area and support the effectiveness of the proposed improvements to mitigate the impacts of the Wynn Casino Resort.

As part of the SSFEIR, the Proponent has updated the analysis and the mitigation plan at Sullivan Square to address comments expressed by the City of Boston. The comments centered primarily on the redistribution of traffic and the lack of an AM peak hour analysis. The results of the new analysis are not significantly different from those presented in the SFEIR and continue to indicate that the Sullivan Square area would experience worsening LOS and increased delay in both the No Build and Build conditions due to projected growth and casino impacts, respectively. With the proposed interim mitigation in place, the SSFEIR analysis demonstrates that traffic operations would generally return to close to No Build conditions (LOS E and F) with moderate reduction of delay in the Build conditions. The Proponent should continue to work with MassDOT and the City of Boston to refine the geometric improvements and optimize traffic operations around the area. In particular, the Proponent should pay close attention to how the proximity of the intersections could impact overall network operations, including MBTA bus operations. These improvements may necessitate the acquisition of ROW along Cambridge Street, Spice Street, and D Street. The Proponent has indicated that they have initiated discussions with the respective property owners and expect that they will cooperate in providing the needed right-of-way upon request. MassDOT believes that this plan provides for


sufficient flexibility for further refinements to address its concerns at the I-93/Cambridge Street intersection and at the MBTA Sullivan Square Station.

Finally, we note that many commenters have suggested that the Boston Metropolitan

Planning Organization’s (MPO’s) regional travel demand model be used to conduct modeling and analysis in light of the project’s potential impact on the transportation system and the regional distribution of its trip patterns. The regional travel demand model is not used for developer-proposed projects, however, but for projects where MassDOT is proposing a project which actually would change the regional travel network. The distinction between those projects that are analyzed using the travel demand model and those that are not is not, as some commenters have suggested, the number of trips generated. Indeed, if MassDOT were to advocate for use of the regional travel model based on the magnitude of trips generated, it is unlikely that the Wynn casino project would require such additional analysis. The projected traffic impacts of the Wynn Casino are no larger than many other projects that have been reviewed through the MEPA process without requiring the use of the regional travel demand model. MassDOT has, for example, provided feedback on traffic generated by the Westwood Station Project (Westwood), the Northborough Crossing Project (Northborough), the Northwest Development Project (Burlington), the Old Colony Place Project (Plymouth), and the Patriot Place Project (Foxborough) without requesting or requiring use of the regional travel model – and all of those projects had traffic impacts that exceeded 20,000 vehicles per day. MassDOT therefore believes that the use of the regional travel demand model is inappropriate in this context and that the Proponent’s transportation study is consistent with the MassDOT/EOEEA’s Transportation Impact Assessment Guidelines (2014) and meets the standards of practice nationally. The numerous MEPA filings on this project have provided sufficient opportunities for agency review and public comment on transportation issues and the methodology of the transportation study.

Draft Section 61 Findings The Draft Section 61 included in SSFEIR outlines a comprehensive package of multimodal improvements to address the project’s impacts. These improvements are detailed in the SSFEIR, but can be briefly summarized as follows: Transit: An Orange Line operating subsidy for 15 years totaling approximately $7.4 million; creation of a comprehensive bus shuttle system for casino patrons and employees; and MBTA station improvements and bus amenities and accommodations. Walking: Pedestrian accommodations at all intersections where improvements are proposed; sidewalk reconstruction along Broadway (Route 99); pedestrian improvements at Sullivan, Wellington, and Malden Stations; and funding towards the design of a potential bridge connecting the Assembly Row Station with the shared use path abutting the site.


Bicycle: Bicycle improvements at a number of intersections, bicycle lanes along Broadway, bicycle improvements along Sweetser Circle, bicycle racks on site, and provision for Hubway bicycles on site. Water Transportation: Provision of a water shuttle available to casino patrons and employees that would connect the site to Downtown Boston. Highway: Implementation of highway improvements at a number of locations in the study area; interim improvements at Sullivan Square; and funding towards a study for future improvements at Wellington Circle. The full list of mitigation measures committed to by the Proponent is included in the SSFEIR, but the above summary portrays the multimodal approach to mitigation to address the project traffic impacts. MassDOT is particularly pleased that extensive discussions and analysis have resulted in a commitment to fund additional transit capacity on the Orange Line as a way to mitigate the project’s impacts. We believe that the SSFEIR provides sufficient information on transportation mitigation to allow the agency to finalize Section 61 findings and support required permitting processes.

MassDOT looks forward to continuing to work with the Proponent during the permitting of the project. The Proponent should also continue coordination with the Cities of Boston, Everett, Somerville, Chelsea, and Medford to implement the mitigation program. MassDOT expects further consultation between the Proponent and the City of Boston to refine the interim mitigation plan for Sullivan Square. The changes resulting from these consultations will be reflected in the Section 61 finding to be issued for the project. Finally, coordination with the MassDOT Office of Transportation Planning and appropriate divisions should continue post-occupancy to implement the monitoring program for the project.

If you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact me at (857) 368-

8862.

MassDOT Comments on Wynn & MEPA

Documents

Transcript of MassDOT Comments on Wynn & MEPA