By Michael Coughlin Jr.
Last week, proponents of the redevelopment of the Austin Street parking lots presented updated plans to the community during a public meeting hosted by the Planning Department.
In 2023, Trinity Financial was tentatively designated by the Boston Planning & Development Agency (BPDA) Board to redevelop the parking lots, which students of Bunker Hill Community College have primarily used.
After gathering feedback from the community, Trinity presented plans at a community meeting last year, which proposed bringing up to 700 units in four buildings, along with several other amenities, including playing fields, open space, areas for the arts, child education, and more.
Fast forward a year, and Trinity again met with the community to discuss the project and relay some updates and changes made to the proposal.
Notably, there has been a change in what is “being considered” for the project, according to Sarah Peck, a development portfolio manager at the Planning Department.
Specifically, a PDA Master Plan for the entire site, a PDA Development Plan, and a Large Project for the proposed Building B are under consideration, Peck said.
“This is a little bit of a change than what was initially under review when this project went out to the community before,” she said.
Peck explained that a PDA Master Plan sets the project’s zoning envelope. “Following the approval of a PDA Master Plan, for each phase or building within that overall master plan area, there will be a PDA Development Plan filed and a Large Project Review filing,” she added.
“So each of these individual filings will undergo a thorough community and city review process, including a BPDA and Zoning Commission vote.”
Moreover, there have been changes to previous plan iterations. First, the phasing has changed according to Christoph Stump, Trinity’s vice president of design and construction.
Initially, Building D, which abutted the proposed playing fields, was slated to be built first; however, since it is located within a Chapter 91 boundary, it would have delayed permitting efforts for the first phase of the project.
“We’re now permitting Building B first as it is not impacted by Chapter 91 and it’s also a little less complex to build,” said Stump, noting that it is a residential building and is easier to finance currently.
It was also noted in the presentation that Phase One would not offer homeownership opportunities due to a lack of subsidies, would have fewer units than initially proposed, and would not include any residential parking.
Another change was the permitting process, which is tied to the aforementioned PDA Master Plan, PDA Development Plan, and Large Project Review.
“Initially, we tried to permit the entire site, both parcels, with all four buildings, for full permits at once, but with the Chapter 91 process in mind and us wanting to help the city and state provide housing quickly, we are changing that permitting approach,” said Stump.
The third significant change mentioned was the site plan. Specifically, Stump pointed to issues with last year’s plan, including drop-off areas and building entrances that conflicted with industrial traffic, proposed on-street parking, landscaping, and a shared-use path that would block future MBTA infrastructure, among other concerns.
The new site plan introduces changes, including the addition of driveways to separate industrial and residential traffic, and reconfiguration of building orientation to ensure entrance and drop-off areas are located away from Middle and Service Roads.
Furthermore, there are massing changes in the new proposal. Building B, previously referred to as Building Two, has been reduced to seven stories from 12. Building 3, now referred to as Building C, added a floor, increasing its height from eight to nine stories.
Also, the number of proposed 90-by-90-foot playing fields has been reduced from four to three, and a proposed plaza has been revised.
Regarding the number of units proposed, it has increased a bit from 700 last year, but the configuration has changed.
Building One initially proposed a mix of 189 market and affordable rental units, along with arts and culture space. The new plans indicate that the building (now Building A) will house 250 units and retain the arts and culture space.
Building Two (Building B) has been reduced to 123 units of “mixed-income, high-quality housing,” according to James Keefe, an assistant project manager at Trinity, down from the initially proposed 216 affordable rental units, and it will also lose its planned retail space.
Building Three (Building C) has expanded from 149 units of market and affordable homeownership and child education space to 160 units with child education space.
Building Four (Building D), initially planned to have 146 units of affordable homeownership with recreation, has been increased to 170 units, retaining the recreation space.
It should be noted that the type of dwelling units being provided in Buildings A, C, and D was now marked as TBD in last week’s presentation slideshow.
The presentation slideshow also indicated there are plans for “Up to 30 surface parking spaces and up to 240 garage spaces.”
As the presentation continued, Nancy Ludwig of ICON Architecture, Inc. walked through other design initiatives, such as enhancing connections to various areas and open spaces in the neighborhood.
She also detailed how the open spaces and playing fields on the site would be located closer to the community, the buildings would act as a visual barrier to I-93, and that massing for the buildings would step down to six or seven stories along New Rutherford Avenue and near the neighborhood.
Other topics discussed in the thorough presentation included site constraints, whether that be from permitting boundaries or other aspects, design guides, materials, and more.
Regarding the project timeline, Keefe indicated that the focus for the rest of the year is to advance the design development to obtain Article 80 approval for Phase One and the master plan in the fall.
Construction of Phase One (Building B) is projected to start in early 2027 and be completed in late 2028.
“Subsequent phases would follow with the full build out of the four-building site anticipated by the early 2030s,” said Keefe.
Following the presentation, attendees were invited to comment and ask questions. Some of the main topics covered during the discussion portion of the meeting included unit affordability, noise, air quality, and more.
Regarding affordability, several commenters emphasized that Trinity should strive to keep affordable units, despite the uncertainties surrounding funding.
During the discussion, Abby Goldenfarb, Trinity’s senior vice president, mentioned that the previously mentioned goal of ensuring at least 60% of the units in the project are affordable remains unchanged.
“What has changed really is I think the perspective of instead of planning the entire development and saying this building will be condominiums and this building will be market rate — I think the city wanted to give the community an opportunity to do a deeper dive into each building when that financing is in place or about to be in place and that building is permitted,” she said.
Regarding the air quality portion of the discussion, which has been a concern for residents, it was mentioned that the project team provided the Planning Department with the results of an air quality assessment, which were posted online.
“The air quality studies that we did showed that compared to other city locations, this air quality passed the thresholds we need it to pass in order to be considered safe,” said Goldenfarb.
Regarding noise concerns, Stump indicated that a noise study had been conducted, with the results to be released soon.
For more information about the project, to view a recording of the meeting and the slideshow presentation, visit https://www.bostonplans.org/projects/development-projects/austin-street-lots-redevelopment.
Comments can also be made about the proposal at the abovementioned link or to Peck directly via email to [email protected]. The comment period is slated to end on July 8.