Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facility Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developers propose screened gas storage yard at 290 Binney; board presses on safety and planting
Summary
BXP and project tenant AstraZeneca described a minimized bulk gas storage yard at 290 Binney with lower architectural screening, planter‑based trees over garage areas, and bollards for protection; board members pressed for larger planters, durable detailing and further coordination with CDD and TP&T.
Get email alerts on the Facility Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
During the PB‑315 design update, BXP explained a refined layout for bulk gas storage planned at the 290 Binney building to meet tenant (AstraZeneca) gas‑usage requirements. Keir Evans said the footprint and clearance needs are driven by the tenant's functional requirements and that the team worked with CDD on pedestrian circulation and screening. He described the chosen approach as a lower screen that matches building materiality to help the enclosure 'blend into the landscape.'
Board members raised concerns about planter size, realistic long‑term tree survival over garage planters, and whether the lower screen will do enough to obscure the tanks in pedestrian views. Adam Westbrook asked about safety at the narrow point where service trucks will operate; Keir responded that the stored gases are non‑combustible industrial gases used for laboratory processes and that truck turning studies and curb guidance were carried out. "the first one, the most important thing is these gases are non, non combustible," Keir said when explaining hazard considerations. He added that bollards will be placed inside the screen to protect tanks from vehicle impacts and that the project team has studied multiple screen heights and detailing options with staff.
The board requested that final materiality, bottom detailing, planter soil volumes and maintenance plans be refined with CDD and incorporated into subsequent submittals. The design approach will be subject to continuing staff review; the Planning Board provided advisory comments but did not grant a final design approval.
