====== Boston Article 80 Development Review (Large Project Review) ====== //This page models a legal/regulatory process for teaching and reference. It is not legal advice.// {{tag>boston article80 development-review bpmn draft}} ===== Summary ===== The path a large development project follows through Boston's Article 80 review: classification, filing, scoping and public engagement, the impact report and its adequacy determination, Boston Civic Design Commission review (now Article 81), the board vote, and — on approval — the development agreement and mitigation. This models the **Large Project Review** track. The threshold decision that routes a project here (vs. Small, PDA/IMP, notification, or no review) lives on its own page, per the one-diagram-per-page rule. Boston's review process is mid-modernization (fully in effect 2026), so several steps are flagged for review below. ===== Process diagram ===== A proposed project enters the City's development-review determination. f1 Business-rule step: apply the threshold decision to classify the project. f1 f2 Routes the project to its review track. f2 f3 f4 f6 f7 f8 Below thresholds; proceeds via as-of-right permitting. f3 Interior/renovation projects file a notification instead of full review (modernization). f4 f5 Notification path terminal. f5 Planned Development Area (80C) or Institutional Master Plan (80D) review - separate model. f6 Small Project Review (80E) - separate model. f7 Large Project Review begins with a Letter of Intent. f8 f9 Applicant files the PNF describing the project. f9 f10 Planning Dept issues a Scoping Determination and convenes the impact advisory group; early engagement. f10 f11 Scoping and filings are subject to public comment. f11 f12 Applicant files the DPIR addressing scoped impacts. f12 f13 Planning Dept issues an Adequacy Determination on the impact report. f13 f14 f16 Applicant addresses inadequacies and refiles. f14 f15 Some projects require Boston Civic Design Commission review under the new Article 81. f15 f16 f17 f19 Design review before the BCDC. f17 f18 The board votes on adequacy/approval of the project. f18 f19 f20 Approval decision. f20 f21 f23 On approval: cooperation/development agreement, mitigation, and any Development Impact Project exactions. f21 f22 Successful terminal state. f22 Board declines approval. f23 ===== Process steps ===== - **Project proposed** ''(Start_ProjectProposed)''. - **Determine Article 80 review path** ''(Task_DeterminePath)'' — business-rule step; calls [[decisions:boston-article80-threshold]]. - **Which review path?** ''(GW_Path)'' — routes to no-review / rehab notification / PDA-IMP / Small / Large. - **File Letter of Intent** ''(Task_LOI)'' → **Project Notification Form** ''(Task_PNF)''. - **Scoping Determination; convene advisory group** ''(Task_Scoping)'' → **Public comment period** ''(Task_PublicComment)''. - **File Draft Project Impact Report** ''(Task_DPIR)''. - **Adequacy determination met?** ''(GW_Adequacy)'' — if not, **Revise & refile** ''(Task_Revise)''. - **BCDC design review required?** ''(GW_BCDC)'' — if so, **BCDC review (Art. 81)** ''(Task_BCDC)''. - **Planning board / BRA vote** ''(Task_BoardVote)'' → **Board approves?** ''(GW_Decision)''. - **Execute development agreement & mitigation** ''(Task_Agreement)'' → **Large project approved** ''(End_Approved)''; else **Project denied** ''(End_Denied)''. ===== Eligibility & decision logic ===== Classification into this track is delegated to the DMN at [[decisions:boston-article80-threshold]] (called at ''Task_DeterminePath''). The in-process gateways are ''GW_Adequacy'' (Adequacy Determination, § 80B-5), ''GW_BCDC'' (Article 81 design-review trigger), and ''GW_Decision'' (board approval). ===== Regulatory basis ===== ^ Element ^ Authority ^ Note ^ | ''Task_DeterminePath'' | Art. 80 § 80-3 | applicability / classification | | ''Task_LOI'', ''Task_PNF'' | Art. 80B | large-project filings | | ''Task_Scoping'' | Art. 80B | scoping determination; advisory group | | ''Task_DPIR'' | Art. 80B | draft project impact report | | ''GW_Adequacy'' | Art. 80B-5 | adequacy determination | | ''GW_BCDC'', ''Task_BCDC'' | Art. 81 | Boston Civic Design Commission | | ''Task_Agreement'' | Art. 80B-7 | development agreement; DIP exactions | **Transition note:** The old BPDA has been replaced by the City Planning Department, and the Article 80 modernization is the most substantial change since 1996, fully in effect in 2026. Body names and thresholds are in flux — see gaps. ===== Known gaps & open questions (review agenda for Al) ===== * **Advisory body** (''Task_Scoping'') — modernization introduces Community Advisory Teams and an early-engagement toolkit; confirm the current body and timeline. * **Adequacy iteration** (''GW_Adequacy''/''Task_Revise'') — the real process iterates with supplemental filings; modeled here as a single revise step, not a loop. * **BCDC trigger** (''GW_BCDC'') — a 200,000 SF threshold surfaced in modernization comments; confirm the current trigger and the "Projects of Special Significance" discretionary triggers. * **Voting body** (''Task_BoardVote'') — confirm the current name/authority post-BPDA-to-Planning-Department transition. ===== Test cases ===== * [[cases:boston-a80-large-approved]] — large project, adequate, BCDC review, approved. * [[cases:boston-a80-substantial-rehab]] — interior renovation routed to notification only. ===== Related models ===== * [[decisions:boston-article80-threshold]] — the routing decision (embedded call). * Boston Small Project Review (80E) — //to be created//. * Boston PDA (80C) / IMP (80D) review — //to be created//. ===== Provenance & review ===== ^ Field ^ Value ^ | Draft author | Anson Parker (with Claude) | | Proposed steward | Al Lee | | Status | draft — awaiting first review | | Changelog | 2026-06-27 — created; Large Project Review track; 4 gateways / 6 outcomes |