Bill may stall Bullfinch Triangle project
Having overcome many delays and hurdles, the $140 million Avenir residential project in the Bulfinch Triangle in Boston appeared to be moving forward to an August groundbreaking under new owner Archstone Smith.
But now it may have hit another roadblock.
Massachusetts lawmakers remain at odds over creating a new system for regulating construction in filled, landlocked tidelands, such as the Avenir site on Canal Street, making it uncertain when it and other such projects can proceed to construction.
Yesterday, the Massachusetts Senate adopted legislation that is substantially different from a version passed last week by the House. The legislation is needed after the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled in February that state regulators did not have authority to exempt projects on landlocked filled tidelands -- those which do not front directly on water -- from review under a state law that mandates public benefits for developments along river and waterways.
The tidelands in question are wetlands that were long ago filled in to make dry, buildable land and which now do not abut water. The ruling concerns thousands of acres of land in downtown Boston and East Cambridge, and elsewhere along coasts and rivers.
The Senate bill passed yesterday would provide an automatic exemption for these projects from increased regulatory scrutiny. The House version would not exempt future projects; instead it would create a more involved review of such projects, including adding the position of state permitting director for tidelands.
With so many differences between them, House and Senate lawmakers may not be able to reconcile their versions soon, especially with the Legislature more or less on summer vacation after yesterday. That means a Sept. 6 deadline set by the court for a solution may pass.
Charles V. Reed is vice president of Raymond Property Co. LLC, which hopes to start a long-awaited supermarket in the Bulfinch Triangle this fall. "The idea that this is going to delay a supermarket on our Canal Street site is something that causes us huge heartburn," he said.
The current debate over how to remedy the situation pits developers against project opponents and private property rights advocates against those who favor more public access and accommodations.
Vivien Li, executive director of the Boston Harbor Association, said the Senate bill, which is almost identical to what Governor Deval Patrick proposed as a remedy in March, would do the trick.
"Our interest has been to deal with what the court was concerned with," said Li. "For us the status quo as it's been for 17 years has been fine."
The dispute began when a coalition of neighborhood groups challenged an exemption state regulators had granted to the NorthPoint project in East Cambridge. The state Department of Environmental Protection had exempted the 44-acre project from the so-called Chapter 91 review process.
The Cambridge opponents want NorthPoint developers to provide more public amenities. They are looking for an improved park and better drainage of an area in NorthPoint that was formerly the Millers River and is now filled in. They also would like to see compensation to the public for the elimination of the river, so the land could be used as a railroad yard.
The Supreme Judicial Court agreed with the Cambridge opponents that the DEP could not exempt NorthPoint.
Stash Horowitz, vice president of the Association of Cambridge Neighborhoods, said any new law should demand more of NorthPoint's developers and protect similar developable lands in the future.
"Any project over a certain size that has implications for storm water or groundwater should not be able to avoid the public process of Chapter 91 licensing," he said. "That's the only place where the public process intervenes for better projects."
Thomas C. Palmer Jr. can be reached at tpalmer@globe.com. 
