DOCSLIB.ORG

Central Artery (I-93)/ Tunnel (I-90) Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Central Artery (I-93)/ Tunnel (I-90) Project Commonwealth of Massachusetts Central Artery (I-93)/ Tunnel (I-90) Project Operating Certification of the Project Ventilation System Technical Support Document September 30, 2011 Prepared For Massachusetts Department of Transportation by TRC/Parsons Brinkerhoff 2011 Operating Re-Certification of the Project Ventilation System Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................... I INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 1–1 PART I – VENTILATION SYSTEM – OPERATION AND EMISSION LIMITS ......................... 1-1–1 1 DESCRIPTION OF CENTRAL ARTERY/TUNNEL PROJECT VENTILATION SYSTEMS 1–1 1.1 Ventilation System Design Criteria ............................................................................................... 1–1 1.2 Feasible Emission Control Technologies .................................................................................... 1–20 1.3 Tunnel Operating Conditions ...................................................................................................... 1–21 1.4 Ventilation System Physical Properties ...................................................................................... 1–21 2 DETERMINATION OF EMISSION LIMITS .......................................................................... 2–26 2.1 Project Preconstruction Certification Acceptance Record ......................................................... 2–26 2.2 MassDEP Regulatory Requirements for Operating Certifications ............................................. 2–27 2.3 Acceptance of Concentration–Based Emission Limits ................................................................ 2–28 2.4 Acceptance of emission Limits Established in 2006 Application ................................................ 2–29 2.5 2011 Re-Certification Process .................................................................................................... 2–29 2.6 Technical Approach .................................................................................................................... 2–31 2.7 Emission Limit Determination .................................................................................................... 2–37 2.8 Proposed Operating Emission Limits ......................................................................................... 2-78 2.9 Operating Certification criteria .................................................................................................. 2-79 PART II – COMPLIANCE MONITORING PROGRAM .............................................................. 3-2-81 3 PROJECT COMPLIANCE MONITORING SYSTEM ............................................................. 3-81 3.1 MassDEP 310 CMR 7.38(8) Regulatory Requirements .............................................................. 3-81 3.2 Emissions Measurement Methodologies ..................................................................................... 3-81 3.3 Continuous Emissions Monitoring Systems Description ............................................................. 3-81 3.4 Continuous Emissions Monitoring Systems Initial Certification ................................................ 3-86 3.5 Traffic Monitoring ...................................................................................................................... 3-89 4 CONTINUOUS EMISSIONS MONITORING PLAN .............................................................. 4-89 4.1 Project-Wide Quality Assurance/Quality Control Program ....................................................... 4-89 4.2 Training ...................................................................................................................................... 4-93 PART III - RECORD KEEPING AND REPORTING ................................................................... 5-4-99 5 DATA RECORDING AND REPORTING ................................................................................ 5-99 5.1 MassDEP 310 CMR 7.38(9) Regulatory Requirements .............................................................. 5-99 5.2 Continuous Emissions Monitoring Measurement Data Processing .......................................... 5-100 5.3 Traffic Data Processing ............................................................................................................ 5-100 5.4 Tunnel Ventilation System Maintenance Records ..................................................................... 5-100 5.5 Continuous Emissions Monitoring Data Summary Reports ...................................................... 5-100 PART IV - CORRECTIVE ACTIONS ......................................................................................... 6-5-119 6 CONTINGENCY PLAN .......................................................................................................... 6-119 6.1 General Requirements (310 CMR 7.38(4)) ............................................................................... 6-119 6.2 Compliance Status Determination for Day-to-Day Operations ................................................ 6-119 6.3 Pre-emptive Actions .................................................................................................................. 6-120 6.4 Corrective (Contingency) Actions ............................................................................................. 6-121 6.5 Mitigation Plan ......................................................................................................................... 6-122 i 2011 Operating Re-Certification CA/T Project: Technical Support Document Appendices Appendix A MassDEP Final Acceptance of the 2006 Central Artery/Tunnel Operating Certification (December 22, 2006) Appendix B Air Quality Analysis Protocol for Determination of Emission Limits as Part of the Operating Certification of the Project Ventilation Systems Appendix B-1 2006 Air Quality Analysis Protocol for Determination of Emission Limits as Part of the Operating Certification of the Project Ventilation Systems Appendix B-2 2011 Air Quality Analysis Protocol for the Determination of PM2.5 Emission Limits and Verification of VOC Emissions Budget for the Renewal of the Operation Certification for the Project Ventilation System Appendix C Air Quality Impact Analysis Supporting Data Appendix C-1 2006 Air Quality Impact Analysis Supporting Data Appendix C-2 2011 Air Quality Impact Analysis Supporting Data for PM2.5 emission Limit Demonstration Appendix C-3 Air quality Analysis for VOC Compliance Appendix D CEM Certification Test Data (Audits, Calibration, Certification) Appendix E CEM Data 2006-2011 Appendix F MassDEP Correspondence Appendix F-1 Recertification Process Appendix F-2 Emission Limits Exceedances and ELA Assessments Appendix F-3 Air Quality Analysis Protocol MassDEP approval letters Appendix G Monitoring Equipment Standard Operating Procedures Attachment 1: CEM Air Emissions Monitoring Protocol ii 2011 Operating Re-Certification of the Project Ventilation System LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1: Physical Limits of CA/T Project ....................................................................................................... 1–2 Figure 1-2: Schematic of Full-Transverse Ventilation System ........................................................................... 1–4 Figure 1-3: Ventilation Building 4 Ventilation Schematic Diagram ................................................................... 1–4 Figure 1-4: Location of Ventilation Buildings .................................................................................................... 1–5 Figure 1-5: Location of Ventilation Building 1 ................................................................................................... 1–6 Figure 1-6: Location of Ventilation Building 3 ................................................................................................... 1–7 Figure 1-7: Location of Ventilation Building 4 ................................................................................................... 1–8 Figure 1-8: Location of Ventilation Building 5 ................................................................................................... 1–9 Figure 1-9: Location of Ventilation Building 6 ................................................................................................. 1–10 Figure 1-10: Location of Ventilation Building 7 ................................................................................................. 1–11 Figure 1-11: Location of Existing DST Exit Portal ............................................................................................. 1–13 Figure 1-12: Location of Ramp Portals 1(L-CS) and 3 (SA-CN) ........................................................................ 1–14 Figure 1-13: Locations of Ramp Portal 2 (CN-S) ............................................................................................... 1–15 Figure 1-14: Locations of Ramp Portals 4 (ST-CN) and 5 (ST-SA) ................................................................... 1–16 Figure 1-15: Locations of Ramp Portal 6 (CS-SA) ............................................................................................. 1–17 Figure 1-16: Location of Ramp Portal 7 (CS-P) .................................................................................................. 1–18 Figure 1-17: Location of Ramp Portal 8 (F) .......................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Annual Report of the Performance and Asset Management Advisory Council Presented By
    Annual Report of the Performance and Asset Management Advisory Council presented by Performance and Asset Management Advisory Council Patricia Leavenworth, P.E., Chair November 2017 Annual Report of the Performance and Asset Management Advisory Council Executive Summary MassDOT’s progress in implementing asset management is keeping Massachusetts apace with Federal requirements. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) have implemented final transportation asset management (TAM) rules in 2017 that impact how MassDOT measures and communicates the condition of its assets. Transportation Asset Management Plans FHWA and FTA rules require the Highway Division, the MBTA, the Rail and Transit Division, and each RTA to complete a transportation asset management plan (TAMP for Highway, TAM Plan for transit). The status on these plans is as follows: Highway | Will be submitted to FHWA in April, 2018. MBTA | Will be submitted to FTA by October, 2018. Rail | A consultant has been retained for delivery of an asset management plan for rail by February, 2018. This plan is not required by any Federal rule, but MassDOT is pursuing it to improve asset management at the agency. Transit | MassDOT is making progress toward submitting the TAM Plan for MassDOT’s in-house transit assets and those of its Federal Aid sub-recipients to FTA by October, 2018. RTAs | Each RTA is at a different stage in the development of their asset management plans, due to the FTA by October, 2018. MassDOT is ready to assist if asked. Performance and Condition Key performance and asset management findings of this report are summarized below by asset type and division.
    [Show full text]
  • Massachusetts Oversize/ Overweight Permit Manual
    Oversize/ Overweight Permit Manual Massachusetts Foreword The Specialized Carriers & Rigging Association is pleased to publish this Oversize/ Overweight Permit Manual. Each state analysis includes information in a standardized format: contact, legal limits, special permit limits, general restrictions, types of permits available, fees, escort needs, fines, and restricted travel areas. Telephone numbers, locations, and hours of operation are listed for ports of entry and permit branches. However, readers are always advised to check with the state offices on current laws and procedures. This project could not have been completed without the advice and consultation of many state officials. We thank all of those who provided permit manuals, maps, laws, regulations, and various other forms of documentation. Legal Notice This SC&RA Oversize/Overweight Permit Manual is intended only to provide concise, easily read information, useful in planning movements of overdimensional and overweight loads. This Permit Manual is not intended to be an accurate summary of all the applicable laws and regulations. Users of the Permit Manual should confirm the information contained herein before dispatching vehicles and loads. The SC&RA cautions Permit Manual users that state laws and regulations are subject to change without notice, and that some time elapses between the effective date of such changes and the amendment of the Permit Manual to reflect those changes. The SC&RA assumes no responsibility for accident, injury, loss or claim, penalties or any other
    [Show full text]
  • Oversight Hearing on the Boston Central Artery/Tunnel Project
    S. HRG. 106–1110 OVERSIGHT HEARING ON THE BOSTON CENTRAL ARTERY/TUNNEL PROJECT HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION MAY 3, 2000 Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation ( U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 80–706 PDF WASHINGTON : 2003 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate Apr 24 2002 08:01 Jun 10, 2003 Jkt 080706 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 S:\WPSHR\GPO\DOCS\80706.TXT SCOM1 PsN: CAROLT SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona, Chairman TED STEVENS, Alaska ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, South Carolina CONRAD BURNS, Montana DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii SLADE GORTON, Washington JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia TRENT LOTT, Mississippi JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas JOHN B. BREAUX, Louisiana OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine RICHARD H. BRYAN, Nevada JOHN ASHCROFT, Missouri BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota BILL FRIST, Tennessee RON WYDEN, Oregon SPENCER ABRAHAM, Michigan MAX CLELAND, Georgia SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas MARK BUSE, Republican Staff Director MARTHA P. ALLBRIGHT, Republican General Counsel KEVIN D. KAYES, Democratic Staff Director MOSES BOYD, Democratic Chief Counsel (II) VerDate Apr 24 2002 08:01 Jun 10, 2003 Jkt 080706 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 S:\WPSHR\GPO\DOCS\80706.TXT SCOM1 PsN: CAROLT C O N T E N T S Page Hearing held on May 3, 2000 ................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Big Dig $458.2 Million Global Agreement
    Big Dig $458.2 Million Global Agreement State Agencies State A-Z Topics Skip to main content Need help resizing text? State Forms The Official Website of the Attorney General of Massachusetts Attorney General in Attorney General Martha Coakley About the Attorney Consumer Doing Business in Government News and Updates Public Safety Bureaus General's Office Resources Massachusetts Resources Home News and Updates Press Releases 2008 MARTHA COAKLEY For Immediate release - January 23, 2008 ATTORNEY GENERAL Big Dig Management Consultant and Designers To Pay $450 Million Media Contact Press Conference Audio and Supporting Documents Included Below Massachusetts Attorney General's Office: Emily LaGrassa (617) 727-2543 BOSTON - The joint venture of Bechtel/Parsons Brinckerhoff, Bechtel Infrastructure Corp., and PB Americas, Inc., f/k/a Parsons U.S. Attorney's Office: Brinckerhoff Quade and Douglas, Inc. ("Bechtel/Parsons Brinckerhoff"), the management consultant to the Central Artery/Tunnel Christina DiIorio-Sterling Project ("the Big Dig") has agreed to pay over $407 million to resolve its criminal and civil liabilities in connection with the collapse (617) 748-3356 of part of the I-90 Connector Tunnel ceiling and defects in the slurry walls of the Tip O'Neill tunnel. In addition, 24 Section Design Consultants-other contractors who worked on various parts of the project--have agreed to pay an additional $51 million to resolve certain cost recovery issues associated with the design of the Big Dig. In total, the United States and the Commonwealth will recover $458 million, including interest. United States Attorney Michael J. Sullivan, Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley, Theodore L.
    [Show full text]
  • Computer-Aided Construction Planning for Boston's Central Artery Project
    TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD 1282 57 Computer-Aided Construction Planning for Boston's Central Artery Project BRIAN R. BRENNER Some new computer applications are being developed for and Roule IA applied to the construction planning and traffic studies associated with the design of the Central Artery and Third Harbor Tunnel in Boston. This project is one of the most massive and complex urban highway projects in the country. It features an immersed­ tube harbor tunnel, depression of the downtown expressway in a cut-and-cover tunnel without interrupting service on the existing overhead viaduct, major new or revised urban interchanges, and long-span river crossings. The construction site, with its old exist­ ing and historic buildings and subways, permits limited clear­ ances, posing formidable challenges to engineers planning the work. The computer applications described include computerized composite mapping for archeological planning; analysis of mul­ tilevel curved-girder viaducts; transportation forecasting using highway network models; planning associated with the construc­ tion of the depressed Central Artery tunnels; and computer-aided 1-90 planning and mitigation measures for underpinning, protection of a subway tube, and other construction problems. The Central Artery and Third Harbor Tunnel (CA/THT) SOUTH BOSTON project is a massive urban highway improvement job being planned and designed in Boston. A key map is shown in Figure 1. The work features the addition of a third harbor tunnel, a •••• • • • • Artery/Tunnel Project new immersed tube tunnel that will cross Boston Harbor and extend I-90 to Logan Airport and Route lA. The six-lane FIGURE 1 Key map, CA/THT project.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 233/Monday, December 4, 2000
    Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 233 / Monday, December 4, 2000 / Notices 75771 2 departures. No more than one slot DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION In notice document 00±29918 exemption time may be selected in any appearing in the issue of Wednesday, hour. In this round each carrier may Federal Aviation Administration November 22, 2000, under select one slot exemption time in each SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, in the first RTCA Future Flight Data Collection hour without regard to whether a slot is column, in the fifteenth line, the date Committee available in that hour. the FAA will approve or disapprove the application, in whole or part, no later d. In the second and third rounds, Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the than should read ``March 15, 2001''. only carriers providing service to small Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. hub and nonhub airports may L. 92±463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: participate. Each carrier may select up is hereby given for the Future Flight Patrick Vaught, Program Manager, FAA/ to 2 slot exemption times, one arrival Data Collection Committee meeting to Airports District Office, 100 West Cross and one departure in each round. No be held January 11, 2000, starting at 9 Street, Suite B, Jackson, MS 39208± carrier may select more than 4 a.m. This meeting will be held at RTCA, 2307, 601±664±9885. exemption slot times in rounds 2 and 3. 1140 Connecticut Avenue, NW., Suite Issued in Jackson, Mississippi on 1020, Washington, DC, 20036. November 24, 2000. e. Beginning with the fourth round, The agenda will include: (1) Welcome all eligible carriers may participate.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Artery/Tunnel Project: a Precast Bonanza
    PART 1 Central Artery/Tunnel Project: A Precast Bonanza by Vijay Chandra, P.E. Anthony 1. Ricci, RE. Senior Vice President Chief Bridge Engineer Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Central Artery/Tunnel Project Douglas, Inc. Massachusetts Turnpike Authority New York, New York Boston, Massachusetts This article provides an overview of the monumental efforts of Massachusetts transportation officials, their engineering consultants, and multitudes of construction industry professionals to ease congestion, improve motorist safety, and address issues of environmental quality in the heart of Boston, Massachusetts. The Central Artery/Tunnel Project is the largest highway construction job ever undertaken in the United States, involving many diverse types of precast concrete construction. maj or transportation infrastructure undertaking, • Standardized temporary structures utilizing precast con billed as “The Big Dig,” is transforming traffic op crete elements. A erations in and around Boston, Massachusetts. This • Precast segmental box girders integrated into cast-in-place $13.2 billion project, the biggest and most complex trans columns to provide seismically resistant connections. portation system ever undertaken in the United States, is • Precast segmental boxes cut at a skew to connect them on significant not only in this country, but worldwide. Nu either side of straddle bents. merous innovative construction techniques are being used, The project has brought out the best that precast con including: crete technology has to offer — in many cases utilizing • Precast tunnels jacked under railroad embankments. cutting edge techniques — and has been of immeasurable • Deep soil mixing to stabilize land reclaimed from the value to New England’s precasting industry. Precasters, ocean. faced with many complex and daunting challenges, are • Precast concrete immersed tube tunnels.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Artery/Tunnel Project: Innovative Use of Precast Segmental Technology
    PART 2 Central Artery/Tunnel Project: Innovative Use of Precast Segmental Technology Paul J. Towell, P.E. Part 1 of this series of articles on Boston’s Central Senior Bridge Engineer Artery/Tunnel Project presented an overview of the Bechtel/Parsons Brinckerhoff scope of the work. This Part 2 article describes the New York, New York innovative use of precast concrete segments, as well as other construction techniques, on two major interchanges. he $13.2 billion Central Artery/Tunnel Project (CA/ T) is a major reconstruction of the urban interstate Peter A. Mainville Thighway through downtown Boston, Massachusetts. Assistant Resident Engineer In the last issue, an overview of the entire project was given. Bechtel/Parsons Brinckerhoff This second article on the project will focus on the inter- New York, New York changes that act as gateways to the project in various parts of the city. Most of the new structures are being built over and Vijay Chandra, P.E. around existing deteriorating interchanges that must carry Senior Vice President traffic during construction. As a result, maintenance of Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc. traffic flow through existing interchanges and phased New York, New York construction of new interchanges were given priority. This, coupled with making the interchanges aesthetically pleasing and addressing urban planning issues, has been a challenge. Two major interchanges are located at the north and south ends of the I-93 corridor through Boston: the I-93/Route 1 Interchange in Charlestown (see Fig. 1) and the I-93/I-90 South Bay Interchange just south of downtown Boston (see Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • But How Do We Get to the Greenway?
    Proceedings of the Fábos Conference on Landscape and Greenway Planning Volume 4 Article 6 Issue 1 Pathways to Sustainability 2013 “But How Do We Get to the Greenway?”— A Multi-disciplinary, Multi-jurisdiction, Multimodal Strategy to Increase Connections to the Charles River Basin Cynthia Smith FASLA Vice President, Halvorson Design Partnership, Inc., Landscape Architecture and Planning, Boston MA Phil Goff EEDL AP Alta Planning + Design, Multi-modal Specialists, Boston, MA Christopher M. Greene RLA Senior Associates, Halvorson Design Partnership, Inc., Landscape Architecture and Planning, Boston MA Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/fabos Part of the Botany Commons, Environmental Design Commons, Geographic Information Sciences Commons, Horticulture Commons, Landscape Architecture Commons, Nature and Society Relations Commons, and the Urban, Community and Regional Planning Commons Recommended Citation Smith, Cynthia FASLA; Goff, Phil LEED AP; and Greene, Christopher M. RLA (2013) "“But How Do We Get to the Greenway?”— A Multi-disciplinary, Multi-jurisdiction, Multimodal Strategy to Increase Connections to the Charles River Basin," Proceedings of the Fábos Conference on Landscape and Greenway Planning: Vol. 4 : Iss. 1 , Article 6. Available at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/fabos/vol4/iss1/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Proceedings of the Fábos Conference on Landscape and Greenway Planning by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Smith et al.: Connections to the Charles River “But how do we get to the Greenway?”— a multi-disciplinary, multi-jurisdiction, multi- modal strategy to increase connections to the Charles River Basin Cynthia Smith, FASLA1, Phil Goff, LEED AP2, Christopher M.
    [Show full text]
  • Ventilation System
    Commonwealth of Massachusetts Central Artery (I-93)/ Tunnel (I-90) Project Operating Certification of the Project Ventilation System Supplemental Application Technical Support Document Final Report August 1, 2012 Prepared For Massachusetts Department of Transportation by TRC/Parsons Brinkerhoff 2012 Supplemental Application to 2011 CA/T Renewal Operating Certification of the Tunnel Ventilation System Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................ I INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 1 PART I – VENTILATION SYSTEM – OPERATION AND EMISSION LIMITS ......................... 1–1 1 Description of Central Artery/Tunnel Project Ventilation Systems ............................................ 1–1 1.1 Ventilation System Design Criteria ........................................................................................................ 1–1 1.1.1 Full-Transverse Ventilation ........................................................................................................................... 1–3 1.1.1.1 System Description .................................................................................................................................. 1–3 1.1.2 Longitudinal Ventilation ............................................................................................................................. 1–12 1.1.2.1
    [Show full text]
  • Esplanade Cultural Landscape Report - Introduction 1
    C U L T U R A L L A N D S C A P E R E P O R T T H E E S P L A N A D E B O S T O N , M A S S A C H U S E T T S Prepared for The Esplanade Association 10 Derne Street Boston, MA 02114 Prepared by Shary Page Berg FASLA 11 Perry Street Cambridge, MA 02139 April 2007 CONTENTS Introduction . 1 PART I: HISTORICAL OVERVIEW 1. Early History (to 1893) . 4 Shaping the Land Beacon Hill Flat Back Bay Charlesgate/Bay State Road Charlesbank and the West End 2. Charles River Basin (1893-1928) . 11 Charles Eliot’s Vision for the Lower Basin The Charles River Dam The Boston Esplanade 3. Redesigning the Esplanade (1928-1950) . 20 Arthur Shurcliff’s Vision: 1929 Plan Refining the Design 4. Storrow Drive and Beyond (1950-present) . 30 Construction of Storrow Drive Changes to Parkland Late Twentieth Century PART II: EXISTING CONDITIONS AND ANALYSIS 5. Charlesbank. 37 Background General Landscape Character Lock Area Playground/Wading Pool Area Lee Pool Area Ballfields Area 6. Back Bay. 51 Background General Landscape Character Boating Area Hatch Shell Area Back Bay Area Lagoons 7. Charlesgate/Upper Park. 72 Background General Landscape Character Charlesgate Area Linear Park 8. Summary of Findings . 83 Overview/Landscape Principles Character Defining Features Next Steps BIBLIOGRAPHY. 89 APPENDIX A – Historic Resources . 91 APPENDIX B – Planting Lists . 100 INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND The Esplanade is one of Boston’s best loved and most intensively used open spaces.
    [Show full text]
  • Map Template
    y t Parcel 12 e a e tr Proposed Boston Our member/sponsors Christopher 5 S 0 w h Museum Project / t 3 r A Columbus n o t n la o Racewalker N t e n s t o ic Park B • Massachusetts Convention Center Authority e A k l r v a • Vanasse Hangen Brustlin e n W G u e © Strider e City bk • Sam Park & Co. h Hall rket Parcel 14 t incy Ma • Massport Qu Park n f Whar Stroller o Long • CEMUSA G k Annual • Eaton Vance l a Meeting 9 • Equity Office t R w Stree • Friends of Post Office Square State Pavilion a 60 New England • Goody Clancy State • Heinz Family FoundationE h Parcel 15 Aquarium t treet i S 8 te S • Liz Levin & Company Co Sta Park urt u w S • McCourt Companies, Inc. tre 4 r bl f E e t Old State a c • Rubin & Rudman d e y House A e • Whole Foods Markets a r t C N t e o 7 w a I r n n d y Thank you r g i n a S r t Parcel 16 e b Don Kindsvatter | Map ree e W s t s e Nina Garfinkle | Garfinkle Design | Design Park e l S r t Ann Hershfang | Bob Sloane | Don Eunson | Text e r e G c e B n t r t o y A e a You can strengthen our voice t e d — S e eet tr tr d e Str S ee r e g r t ate k t Parcel 17 WalkBoston's advocacy on behalf of pedestrians began S W il o n Y n n M i o Park t n 4 t in 1990 when a handful of like-minded citizens decided t g n i e they would be more effective speaking out collectively e h s 5 K e a than individually.
    [Show full text]