Wynn Casino Reps Say Site Doesn't Fall in Boston

Proponents of the Wynn LLC resort casino project this week said that Boston should not get a vote on the project because the casino site does not include any land within the city limits.

But company representatives also urged Boston officials to work with Wynn to address traffic concerns and other issues related to the project as a surrounding community, hinting that the casino’s approval could help fast track the Sullivan Square renovations in Charlestown, which are at least a decade away.

The comments, made by project managers Chris Gordon, John Tocco and others, were part of a discussion hosted by the Charlestown Waterfront Coalition at the group’s regular meeting on Wednesday, Aug. 7. The meeting drew a crowd of more than 100 residents, mostly from Charlestown, as well as local officials from Boston and Everett.

Dispute Over Boundaries

While reviewing Wynn’s extended environmental notification form, an early part of the casino application process that was submitted in May, Boston officials began to question whether the city should be considered a host community, with residents of the closest ward getting a vote on the project.

But Gordon, whose company Dirigo Group is managing the Everett casino development for Wynn, said the boundaries of the property most certainly do not fall within Boston’s jurisdiction.

He said that portions of the current land owner’s total property, which formerly contained the Monsanto chemical plant, do fall in Boston but that Wynn LLC was not looking to include those sections in the casino plan.

“None of the property we’re proposing to develop is in Boston,” Gordon said, acknowledging that there had been some confusion over the issue.

However, he and others from Wynn LLC did admit that the project would have considerable traffic impacts on Boston, particularly on the Charlestown neighborhood.

Traffic Impacts to Charlestown

About 60 percent of the casino’s estimated traffic would come by way of Sullivan Square in Charlestown, said Jeffrey Dirk, a traffic engineer with Vanasse & Associates Inc. He expects the casino to add about 1,300 vehicles to traffic in that area during the peak travel time, after 7 p.m. on a Friday night, and about 1,700 vehicles on a Saturday.

Dirk said the developer would need to work with Boston officials to review the situation at Sullivan Square and possibly advance the improvements proposed there.

“We know that there was an extensive public process,” Dirk said of the Sullivan Square and Rutherford Avenue plan. “Implementation of these improvements is very important to our project as well.”

He also noted that with Wynn LLC’s financial support, much of which is required under casino legislation and through agreements with the state and cities involved, the improvements at Sullivan Square could be pushed through much more quickly.

“We fully expect that we will be working with the City of Boston and with the Massachusetts Department of Transportation to implement portions of these—if not all of these—improvements you see on the slides here,” Dirk said, referring to an image of the proposed surface option improvements at Sullivan Square and Rutherford Avenue.

Boston transportation officials decided in March to go with the surface option after a lengthy, multi-year public review process that concluded in December 2012.

On the Fast Track

If gaming licenses are issued by the first quarter of 2014, as Wynn proponents hope, construction on the casino could start by the end of 2014, with the resort casino opening in early 2017, Gordon said, although he admitted those goals were “ambitious.”

With Sullivan Square playing such an important role in getting people to the site, those improvements could see a similar fast track, with the city being able to bond against expected revenues from the casino to pay for the project earlier than anticipated, Gordon said.

Located between Routes 16 and 99, across the water from Charlestown and next to the Massachusetts Water Resource Authority wind turbine, the proposed Wynn Everett resort casino would feature about 600 hotel rooms in a five-star hotel tower facing the waterfront, a casino area located to the back of the property, about 28 retail shops and restaurants and an indoor “winter garden” that would be open to the public. The project would involve considerable environmental improvements to the site, which Gordon referred to as “very contaminated,” including landscaping and cleanup along the waterfront.

Early plans for the project also include improvements to the Santilli and Sweetser traffic circles in Everett and addition of a dock with water shuttles and taxis that would help get people to the site.

Community Concerns

After the presentation, many people had questions—several about how exactly Wynn would work with the city to address the traffic issue at Sullivan Square. Some questioned whether the surface option could even work for the casino proposal.

Others expressed concerns about the potential crime and social impact of having a casino near their neighborhood.

And some voiced frustration over what they saw as a lack of effort on the part of either side—Boston or Wynn representatives—to have real dialogue about the project and its impact on Boston residents.

One Charlestown resident said she didn’t like how Wynn representatives seemed to be “glossing over” the issue of whether Boston should be considered a host community. She disagreed with their assessment and planned to appeal to the Massachusetts Gaming Commission with a petition seeking host community status for Boston.

Mark Rosenshein, chairman of the Charlestown Neighborhood Council Development Committee, pressed Gordon on the issue of funding for Sullivan Square, asking whether he was suggesting that Wynn might be willing to write the “$85 million check” to make the necessary improvements.

“Given the importance of Sullivan Square, with traffic changing and the timeline the city has of about 10 years ... if your project is expected to open in 2017, don’t you financially have to make Sullivan Square better in order to open successfully?” Rosenshein asked.

Gordon said that issue “needs to be negotiated” as part of a surrounding community agreement with Boston but that the developer would “strongly advocate” that revenues the state requires from the company for roadway improvements be earmarked first for Sullivan Square.

“We agree that Sullivan Square needs a lot of work, and we’re happy to get involved,” Gordon said.

District 1 Boston City Councilor Sal LaMattina, who helped moderate the Q&A portion after Charlestown Waterfront Coalition members left to hold a separate discussion, said he felt Sullivan Square should have been the developer’s No. 1 priority regarding traffic studies.

“There needs to be a mitigation plan for this neighborhood [Charlestown] that benefits this neighborhood,” he said.

More information about the Wynn Everett project can be found online at wynnineverett.com. 

Read More:

>> Surface Option Selected for Rutherford Redesign

>> Wynn Casino Petition Seeks Host Community Designation for Charlestown

>> City of Boston Comments on Wynn LLC EENF

>> The Wynn Project Extended Environmental Notification Form 

>> Letter from State Rep. Gene O'Flaherty

>> Letter from District 1 Boston City Councilor Sal LaMattina

>> Official statement from Boston mayoral candidate Marty Walsh

>> Charlestown Could Be Considered Host Community for Wynn Casino

>> January 2013 letter from Everett city councilor