Garages VI-21 VI-8 Projected 1980 Conditions on External Streets VI-24 VI-9 Peak Hour Levels of Service, 1980 VI-24 VI-10 Automobile Increase Under 1980 Build VI-25 and No Build Assumptions VI-11 Additional Traffic Burden VI-25 VI-12 Tabulation of Additional Space Needs, 1980 with ACC VI-27 VI-13 Daily Parking Requirements, 19 VI-27 VI-14 MGH Building Foundations and Bearing Materials VI-41 VI-15 1980 MGH Utility Demand Without the ACC VI-52 VI-16 1980 MGH Utility Demands with the ACC VI-52 VI-17 Projected Utility Loads for the ACC VI-53 VI-18 Comparison of 1980 MGH Utility Demands VI-53 VI-19 Inventory of Utility Lines on ACC Site VI-53 VI-20 Mesoscale Analysis: Estimates of Transportation- VI-64 generated Pollutants within the MGH Complex VI-21 Background Conditions for Sulfur Dioxide and Suspended Particulates, 1974 VI-65 VI-22 Impact of Ambulatory Care Center on Air Pollution VI-66 Generation within the MGH Complex VI-2 3 Carbon Monoxide Levels Resulting from Total Traffic VI-67 Flow Adjacent to Sensitive Receptors (PPM) : Typical and Worst Case Meteorological Conditions VI-24 Total Carbon Monoxide Levels at the Proposed VI-68 Ambulatory Care Center Due to Grove and Cambridge Street Traffic (Wind Parallel to the Ambulatory Care Center) LIST OF TABLES (CONTINUED) Page VI-2 5 Noise Level and Relative Loudness of Typical VI-70 Noise VI-26 Estimated Construction Noise and Duration of Construction Phase VI-71 VI-27 Construction Noise Level Impact VI-75 VI-28 Components of MGH Solid Waste, 1970 VI-83 VI-29 Relocation of Activities Now in Moseley and VI-118 Walcott Buildings Appendix B-1 Measured Ambient Noise Levels B-2 Usage Factors of Equipment in Nonresidential Construction B-3 Immediate Abatement Potential of Construction Equipment LIST OF FIGURES Page III-l Certificate of Need Alternative III-2 III-2 Clinics Visits to the MGH III-8 III-3 MGH Ambulatory Care Center III-ll IV-1 Site Constraints and Critical Factors IV-3 IV-2 No Build Alternative IV-4 V-1 Map of Immediate Project Area V-2 V-2 Present Ambient Noise Levels • V-16 VI-1 Existing Land Use Patterns VI-5 VI-2 Area Development Plans VI-8 VI-3 Traffic Impact Area VI-14a VI-4 Map Showing Original Shoreline VI-36 VI-5 Photograph of Original Shoreline VI-37 VI-6 Site Constraints & Critical Factors VI-38 VI-7 Boring Location Plan VI-39 VI-8 Generalized Soil Profile VI-40 VI-9 Contour Plan VI-42 VI-10 Utility Map VI-48 VI-11 Boston Marginal Conduit VI-55 VI-12 Boston Marginal Conduit Outlet to Boston Harbor VI-56 VI-13 Boston Marginal Conduit Outlet to Fruit Street VI-57 VI-14 Construction Noise Levels VI-76 VI-15A Effect of ACC on Bulfinch Courtyard VI-89 VI-15B Effect of ACC on MGH Entrance VI-90 VI-16 Area of View Shaded by ACC VI-94 VI-17 Summer Solstice VI-96 VI-18 Winter Solstice VI-97 VI-19 Yearly Surface Wind Rose VI-105 VI-20 Certificate of Need Alternative VI-107 VI-21 Wind Effects VI-108 VII-1 Scheme A VII-13 VII-2 Scheme Bl VII-14 VII-3 Scheme B2 VII-15 VII-4 Scheme CI VII-16 VII-5 Scheme C2 VII-17 VII-6 Pedestrian Circulation VII-37 VII-7 Bicycle Storage Facility Locations VII-44 VII-8 Oxygen Tank Relocation VII-46 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM Introduction In accordance with the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs (EOEA) guidelines for preparing impact statements.
—^ J This agency is charged with the responsibility of reviewing applications from health care facilities for a determination of need under G. Describe the geographical area or areas which will be affected by the project (s), including distinguishing natviral and man-made characteris- tics, and a brief description of the present use of the area or areas. V The Center will be built on the main campus of the Hospital at the Fruit Street location. Aasenamont of Knvi ronmental Damage Answer the following questions by placing a check In the appropriate space; consider both short and long terra damage.
It will be located on North Grove Street on the site of the present Moseley and Wolcott buildings which will be demolished. Wherever "No" is checked, indicate on the lines below the question why there will be no significant damage. Could the project (s) affect the use of a recreational area or area of important aesthetic value? Are any of the natural or man-made features in affected area(s) unique; that is, not found in other parts of the Commonwealth or nation?
There is very little vegetation within the project Short Long Term Term Yes No Yes No area . Could the project (s) change existing features of any of the Conmonwealth 's fresh or salt waters or wetlands?
The project area is not located on or near any of the Commonwea J th ' s fresh or salt waters or wetlands. Could the project(s) change existing features of any of the Commonwealth's beaches?
The completed construction will provide a larger more sympathetic landscaped setting for this hi stor ic bui Iding including restoration of the historic view from the top of Anderson St. The project area is an urban site with no known reserves of natural resources. Does the project (s) area serve as a habitat, food source, nesting place, source of water, etc. The project area is an urban site and does not serve any function for either wildlife or fish. Could the project(s) affect fish, wildlife, or plant life?
Given the project's urban location surrounded by high density development, it is unlikely that it could effect fish, wildlife or plantlife. Are there any rare or endangered plant species in the affected area(s)?
June 30, 1975 NOTICE OF COMMENTS Comments on this draft environmental impact report are encouraged.
All comments should be submitted within 30 days of the publication of this report, or by May 12, 1975.
The environmental team preparing the report was guided by representatives of the DPH, MGH and the Cambridge Street Community Development Corpora- tion (CSCDC) .