and I believe that everybody is now in we it great thank you good evening I'm calling this public hearing to order in accordance with the Massachusetts Wetland protections act mgc 131 section 40 in the Boston Wetlands ordinance Boston city code ordinances chapter 7- 1.4 the Boston Conservation Commission will hold this vir public meeting uh this evening um on May 1st 2024 to review the following projects to determine what conditions if any the commission will impose in order to protect the interests of the public and private water supply groundwater prevention of pollution flood control prevention of storm damage protection of fisheries and land containing shellfish and protection of wildlife habitat excuse me um this public hearing will be followed by our regular meeting and in accordance with chapter 107 of the acts of 2022 we're are conducting this meeting online to ensure public access to the deliberations of the Conservation Commission the public May access this call through telephone and video conferencing Additionally the meeting is being recorded if you do not wish to be recorded please turn off your video members of the public may have an opportunity to ask questions and provide public comment on applications and discussions to do so please raise your hand or type in the chat in the application via the zoom meeting platform if you're calling in and cannot use the platform you can raise your hand by pressing star9 and star 6 to unmute your yourself send your questions to staff um via email at CC boston.gov for the record I Michael Parker chair of the commission uh could staff please identify themselves Elena itary with the environment Department de Hernandez with the environment Department great thank you now I'll call the role of uh Commissioners present commissioner long Nick long commissioner Conan thank you commissioner Richmond Alice Richmond commissioner Herpst and Herpst great thank you okay um we have a quorum issue this evening uh so we're going to have to bump the agenda around a little bit um we'll uh because of those issues uh we're going to hear notice of intent for D file number 0061 991 and Boston file number 2024-the for the proposed dredging of Willow Pond Bank restoration at lever Pond located at 217 Jamaica way Jamaica plane uh resource areas are Inland Bank 100 foot buffer to Inland Bank uh land underwater um bordering land subject to flooding uh 25 foot Riverfront area and 25 foot Waterfront area uh commissioner long do you have something to say yes I have to recuse myself since this has a Boston parks department involvement thank you great thank you okay um who's here on behalf of the applicant hi I am here um Alex Gaspar from Weston and Samson uh lee Costa also here from West Samson representing the city of Brookline and Sam DS um I am the project engineer from the town of Brooklyn great welcome thank you floor is all yours great thank you um so as you mentioned uh this is for the Willow Pond drudging and lever Pond Bank stabilization project um we have a small Locust map to the to the left sort of showing the project area and we have been issued um a d file number next slide so sort of going over the project components there are a couple of pieces here um there is the dredging of Willow Pond uh there is the bank stabilization at Leverett Pond and there are the new plantings um occurring at the west side of Willow Pond um so components this as you may have seen in the Locust map this project is sort of split between the town of Brooklyn and the City of Boston um with the entirety of the lever Pond occurring over on the Brookline side um the only component occurring within the city of Boston and the piece that we are going to be focusing on in this presentation is the dredging of Willow Pond so just a little background um the project area is at 217 Jamaica way in Boston um and as previously mentioned is split between the city of Boston and the town of Brookline the last time this Pond was dredged was in 1963 um and since then we've seen a lot of of sediment um being accumulated sort of reducing that ponds historic capacity um which is why we are proposing to drill dredge about 1,200 cubic yards um this is also we're also hoping that this will enhance habitat for aquatic species which brings me to this slide I did want to take a moment to talk about the three spine stickleback presence in the pond um the three spine stickleback is a small fish pictured top right um as part of this project we have had a lot of correspondence with natural heritage um because there is mapped habitat in Willow Pond um as part of that communication they did uh require that we have an ecological survey done of the pond to sort of look for this fish presence um so we did last year have zo New England go out and perform the survey um no stickleback were found in Willow Pond um however you know just because they weren't found in this survey does not suggest that there are none um so is still deemed you know important to make sure we consider their habitat um in this project um as part of the survey they did sort of make some dredging recommendations um based on the different habitats in Willow Pond this is sort of mapped on the right um with the different habitat areas shown in different colors um this report was provided in the notice of intent I believe so if you want you know a higher level detail that is there but just the long and short of it uh is that they have deemed you know the Blue Area to the South um the dark green area all the way to the north that red area and then like the purple pink area were deemed areas that were okay to dredge um so those were the areas that you know based on the habitat mapping they felt okay with us drudging and and that is what we're moving forward with great Alex could I just ask you a quick question about Zoo New England's involvement here um I was not aware that uh they performed uh these types of surveys um is that common yeah they actually I believe they were um recommended To Us by natural heritage they gave us a list of preferred um vendors and Zoo New England was was on the list so I think this is something they do oh that's interesting okay thank you yeah no problem um next slide so getting to the uh proposed work so this is considered a maintenance dredge um we are using hydraulic dredging um something to note we were originally um proposing mechanical but after after our conversations with natural heritage it was determined that hydraulic drudging was going to have you know lower impact on the animal and fish species um so we did adjust to doing hydraulic drudging um just to minimize impact um so the material is going to be removed by hydraulic suction from either a barge or onshore equipment um and then is going to be pumped to sediment bags with an established um dewatering cells that are going to be along the pond Bank um where the material can drain and dry once all that put isov transported um off site for reuse or disposal um we do have a sediment analysis memo which um is quite long and wasn't included in the notice of intent but can be provided if you want it um and all of that construction and staging is occurring on um the brook line side of the project um we do have a small impact table here at the bottom just outlining the different impacts uh land underwater you can see that the majority of the dredging is within the city of Boston um only a small sliver of the pond um is within the town of Brooklyn so about a th000 cubic yards of dredge is going to be in Boston there's some minimal Bank impact um that is just from temporary fencing and erosion control um there is no flood zone impact and then there is impact um to the 25- foot Riverfront area and Waterfront area um and that is 540 square feet um and that is associated with tree protection um so those are the only impacts um occurring on the city of Boston side um our Forum included does outline all um the total Pro impact so if you were interested in that that was provided um but otherwise we go to the next slide so just some mitigation um we have some temporary core logs straw waddle and silt fencing um that are going to go around you know the staging areas the access points and the dewatering area um those same controls will be used you know down at the downstream end of both the drudging and the lever Pond um restoration work um and as previously mentioned all work is occurring uh within the wet to protect the um existing species within the pond so little more this is um you know some just typical stuff protective crushed stone um will be put in Aries long wheel Pond and that'll be outside of wetland resource areas we'll also be using stabilized construction mats in areas along Willow Pond um where access to the Wetland resource areas is necessary we will be using a wetland seed mix that will be spread along the impacted areas um upon removal of the mats um that's going to be coupled with you know the new plantings that are going on the Brookline side of Willow Pond um we have no tree removal proposed as mentioned um we are going to be using tree protection um for existing trees and then that excavated sent is going to be transported um in covered trucks to an improved facility um following d watering we'll be using the typical bmps uh Tire washing anti-tracking pads um Street and street sweeping just to prevent sediment migration from the work Zone um I believe that is it uh so we now welcome you know any questions or comments on the project okay couple quick ones here um one is I understand that uh you're still waiting for a meepa certificate on your um uh what do you want e single file e y so we have actually received um our our eir certificate oh you did when did you receive that I couldn't find it today um we received that mid April I believe okay April I can um send it to yeah we would definitely like to see that okay um what about the um water quality permit um that is still in progress um it'll need a a water quality per or water quality certificate as well as a um chapter 91 permit um so we are submitting those at the request of chapter 91 those are being submitted um separately not as a joint file yeah we'd be more concerned with the water quality CT um so I know you can't you generally can't get a license your uh chapter 91 lure without your um n uh without your order conditions so when did you I'm sorry if you didn't say I missed it I'm sorry um when do you expect to get the water quality SE um we are still working on pulling that together um we're hoping to submit within the coming week okay okay and then I have some questions on the dewatering process I would imagine that um there is going to be some contaminated sediment um just because that's what happens um you know uh I'd be surprised if there wasn't um so uh as far as the dewatering um requirements uh is that um what's the requirement there are you forced to do that um as far as stockpiling sediments I know you're putting them in bags um I know you've said it's all on the brook line side but I'd like to know more about that process why what one why are you doing it and two I don't see anything in the noi um regarding where they're the um stockpiles will be placed and I'm interested in how close those stockpiles will be um to our jurisdictional area so I can take that one Alex um I guess a little bit of brief context on the pond um there have been historical impacts from a release up gradient of the pond at the former DPW it's a known condition with um Mass D under the Massachusetts contingency plan we did some um preliminary sediment sampling in 2019 19 as part of the early stages of the permitting process and we found some limited impacts just from petroleum um primarily on the brook line side of the ponds so there may still be some limited historical impacts from that release but there wasn't anything too significant um you know compared to other sites of similar nature to this so for the dewatering um the material will be pumped into sediment bags and allowed to drain back into the pond one of the requirements under the mCP is that we cannot create any sheen on surface water um so that's something that's ultimately going to have to be monitored during construction um another requirement under the actually Federal uh Transportation regulations is that the material can't be transported if it's still dripping wet essentially um free liquids need to be removed so that puts us in a situation where we cannot remove the material from the vicinity of the pond until it's at least allowed to dry enough to get it into a truck without leaking out the back essentially um so the uh proposed plan at the moment is that that material will be staged on the brook line side of the bank in the available park space there's a roughly 100 foot area between the edge of the bank and um existing Pathways and other kind of features that we're staying away from which is the limit of our construction zone so all sediment will be temporarily stored in that area until it's dry enough to transport if needed it will be amended with Portland cement or another additive just to basically dry up any of the free liquid um the intent is to move the material offsite as quickly as possible but we do still have to comply with those federal regulations and get it somewhat dry before it's moved um as part of the mCP process a release abatement measure plan will have to be submitted once a contractor is selected and we're through the rest of the permitting process um and that work will be overseen by a licensed site professional um who will be you know ultimately the individual responsible for um mitigation of any lingering impacts from those oil or hazardous materials um if they're encountered and I guess one thing to note I misspoke there there have been no hazardous materials encountered as of yet it's a Nuance in the definition but our impacts are limited to um the historical oil release from back in I want to say the 80s to 90s understood okay that was that was a good explanation thank you um so as far as um the dewatering process itself uh the sediments will be in bags is there another um form of filtration before the um water or the um runoff reaches so we that material will be stored on poly um along the bank so that it won't percolate down into the existing soils then there's row of your typical sediment controls either straw um bails straw Waddles um between the sediment bags and the bank so the material will be filtered both through the bags then through an additional um one to two layers of um straw Waddles or bales um you know before ultimately the water discharges back into the pond and one thing to note if for whatever reason we do encounter um you know areas of more significant petroleum contamination that material will have to under the mCP be managed separately and would likely wind up getting drummed with all the runoff captured but for a project of this nature to do that for all the material winds up being cost prohibitive for off-site disposal of all that material so that would be on a caseby casee basis if it's encountered during construction okay so all of the sediments will be monitored by um one of your LSPs correct okay great thank you um Elena what do you have yeah so um I just wanted to uh flag for the commission again and just to clarify there isn't um explicit regulations that state that the commission should not uh close the hearing prior to these other reviews being completed but um depending on if more information comes to light or if the project uh changes substantially just noting that it might end up requiring an amended order of conditions or um potentially a new noi depending on uh what other reviews say so that was the main note um that we had and then the uh other note that we had is that uh we had spoken to the conservation agent in Brooklyn Tom Brady and uh had just discussed the project given the fact that it's in both jurisdictions um and the thing that Tom had shared was um just again noting that uh the water levels could change after the uh culbert is cleared and all of the debris that's built up there over the last few years uh gets cleared so um that was that was the one thing that he also recommended that we we flag thank you thanks commissioner Conan uh you are first thank you um there was a cubic footage 12200 cubic footage is it how is it distributed um can you explain that so there's uh 1,240 cubic yards of material to be removed of that um 150 fall on the mapped Boston side of the city City Line so the bulk of the pond itself Falls in Boston um so it's 1,50 cubic yards that are from that side of the line okay and they're all is it like evenly distributed or is it closer to the edge it's less or UND understood so the majority of the removal is actually close to the Brookline side of the line as we get for it closer towards the pond Edge on the Boston side it tapers out reason being for that was um communication with nhsp on the three spine stickle back we're trying to preserve as much habitat for that as possible so it's essentially Center Channel if you will that's being um that the majority of that removal is happening at which falls right next to the brook line line I see okay thank you and so did I hear this correctly that it was identified as a habitat for stickle blocks is it stickle backs s stickle backs but no bags were found correct so is that mean the known population is in Spring Pond which is directly adjacent to Willow Pond and so it was it's just established that they're in Spring Pond and so the question from nhp was confirming that there is no population in Willow Pond because of their close proximity to one another I see so you weren't expecting to fight find any to begin with we were not and and Zoo New England had actually independently performed a three-spine stickleback survey a number of years ago and found a similar result that there are no three three spin stickleback in Willow Pond just in Spring Pond and did you see them in Spring Pawn I don't know if you even looked I I do believe that they that they were found in Spring Pond both um eggs and um adults see just curious you know if if the changing climate is affecting their habitat and um I didn't know what not finding meant if they were once there and now not there but it sounds like they were never there as far as we know in will Pond and they're endangered correct they areer the Spring Pond population from what I recall is the southernmost fully freshwater population of that particular fish it's it's claimed to fil so I see that's good to know so is niwi not involved in here are they like the authority to tell us what to look for National Fish and Wildlife Foundation believe I know you mentioned National Heritage but who's the authority here it's it is like mapped um natural heritage habitat so it is you know the division of fisheries and wildlife their habitat yeah which fishing division of fisheries and fish fisheries and wildlife is also consulted as part of the enf and process um and they're generally in accordance with all the um considerations that nhes raised as well I see okay yeah that's helpful thank you that's all I had chair Parker okay thank you uh commissioner Richmond uh yes thank you very much um one of my questions has already been answered um in response to the questions from the chair but the other question I had is uh where is the stuff once it's dried G to go um so as part of the 401 Water Quality SE process we'll be getting um letters from potential receiving facilities indicating that they can accept the material um that'll fall a little later on in the overall permitting timeline but in general um the material will go to an out ofate landfill um TurnKey landfill up in Rochester New Hampshire can in theory the material but in all likelihood it would be going to highacres New York or possibly to a facility up in Scarboro man and is that because you expect it to be contaminated in some way um it's that's largely the driver um the historical uh oil contamination will likely rule it out from going to an instate facility under com 15 regulations that being said additional sampling of the material will ultimately be performed likely during the construction phase and should the data you know come back clean there is the possibility that the material could stay in state but in all likelihood um just based on the physical nature of it as sediment and what we've seen historically it'll be going out of state and is it your sense that whatever is in there is spread equally in the in Willow pound or is there one area that you're expecting to be worse than the rest of we've seen it um in the greatest areas of it that historically have been identified are in the vicinity of drainage outfalls associated with the old system that the oil kind of leaked into um one of the uh measures that were um was raised by nhp is all of the drainage outfalls will be cleared um so that'll also allow us to Target those areas for potential sediment removal um to get anything lingering in the vicinity of those and and how do you clear them same method as the rest of the pond dring that's done with the hydraulic um system and do you do that first before you do the rest or is that how does that happen ultimate um kind of scope and sequence will be up to the contractor but in all likelihood that'll be one of the first areas that they tackle and is there going to be testing that goes on throughout this process to determine whether your sense when I mean your sense but the sense about um contamination is correct or will there be other testing to make sure that that's right there will be um so one of the requirements of the ultimate receiving facility is that the material get tested at a certain frequency it varies depending on the facility but the general rule of thumb is at least one sample per 200 tons of material generated so we'll have you know numerous additional samples collected throughout the drudging process just to confirm that the material meets you know kind of what we expect in terms of camon concentrations and how many tons do you think you're going to be taking out if that was in the the report I I don't remember it see I can do some quick math for you if you'll bear with [Music] me probably in the vicinity of 2,000 to 2500 tons it's about two tons per cubic yard because the material is saturated so so you'll be doing this testing about every about every about 10 times you think while the Project's going on yep and one thing to note the testing requirements are for a whole slew of analytes above and beyond the identified contaminants of concern so in the off chance there was you know a pocket of something unexpected this analysis includes you know numerous things above and beyond the historic oil impacts that we've seen for the material okay thank you very much your answers have been very helpful thank you commissioner Herbst uh sorry um I wanted to ask about impacts on the on the bank I'm looking at your c101 to to get a sense and and you show the top of the bank I guess I'm wondering does your how how far do you d are you dredging to the bottom of the bank is there some yeah if you look at bear with me sheet c103 if you have it in front of you um that shows the overall sediment removal areas um on the Boston side we have those two large areas of no dredging so looking at this we're probably on the order of 40 feet or so away from the bank in those areas there's a little area between the two areas of no dredging where we'll get close to the bank uh but existing Contours show us as still probably about 15 plus feet away from the edge of the bank um as we get closer to the outlet structure uh we're roughly 10 to 15 feet off the edge of the bank in those areas as well so in general the exception it looks like of a really small area on the southern extents where we'll be getting closer to the bank you know where roughly at at most 40 feet away and at closest probably 10 or 15 feet looking at it and is that from the top or the bottom of the bank that would be from let me see bear with me as I Goa where that's all be [Music] from that is from top of Bank at least as I have it shown here okay it it it would be helpful to to know how close you're getting to the bottom of the bank I think part of what I'm trying to understand is you're doing tree protection most of those appear to be above the top of the bank and I'm all for tree protection but you also have a limit of work quite a bit you know beyond that still and I guess I'm just wondering what that's about what what activity if in we should be expecting that would be in those areas yeah one thing I I will note is the tree protection on the Boston side it really is a conservative measure all the access to the pond the staging and whatnot it's all on the brook line side and um The Limited work that may in theory depending on what the contractor selects be done from a barge will solely be within the limits of you know the existing surface water so the um tree protection is really a just in casee um we have no intention of accessing the pond from the city of Boston side or bringing any heavy equipment um you know in the vicinity of the trees over in that area but that's what you'd be protecting it's not your dredge activity it's just in theory if anything were to happen there's no work proposed over there um and in all likelihood and again this will be selected by the contractor as their ultimate means methods this the Pawn's not very large they're probably going to be able to get most of the material with a long arm excavator from the Brookline side without needing a barge it's tight Pawn to even get a barge into in the first place um but that will ultimately be selected by the contractor and so just as a you know conservative measure in the off chance they did need to bring a barge out we did have tree protection on the Boston side just in case and for the limit of work are you putting in erosion control or or marking or or what is the what should we expect there or Alex for the Boston side of the City Line do you off the top of the your head recall what we have for erosion controls don't know if um not off the top of my head I don't believe that and I'll have to double check this on the plans quickly here but um we don't have actually here I found the right sheet on on c101 we don't have anything proposed over there because we aren't tracking onto the bank at all you know any of in theory the access to the material near the bank will be from the water side so we don't have anything currently proposed on that side Li City Line because we won't be going over there on the shore right side of it so the limit of work is sort of theoretical it's not a you're not playing to be over there at all right and your filing does say that you're having know 25 or 30 feet of Bank impact and I can't find that anywhere on the plan Alex do you recall where that falls um I mean I think when we looking at these plans I think we do have some sort of control over there because I think they had said that the 35 ft of Bank impact was from temporary fencing and erosion control um I am just looking for where that is I believe that what that is is there's a limited amount of fencing um that falls right alongside the City Line right next to the existing outfall structure um that as shown we have have it right up against the line and looking at it yeah it's about 30 ft um in length so from what I recall that's likely where that originates from in reality exactly where that line Falls is you know unknown we don't have a dedicated survey of exactly that portion of it but as mapped we have it right along it um so you know that's really the only area in which our erosion controls come close to your side of the city line otherwise everything else with how the City Line Falls um we have uh you know I'll call it a buffer but um at least 10 feet or so of distance between any of our construction staging area in city of Boston property and I I understand you have a time of year restriction what time of year do you expect you would do this so we have a time of year restri between November 15th I mean I believe it's November 15th or November 1st and April 1st so our hope if you know fingers crossed we all know that how slowly things can go but our hope is that if we do get all approvals by this uh this November that we would be able to start and complete the project in three months during uh the time of year restriction between November and the end of end of March beginning of April oh I'm sorry I misunderstood so the you are restricted to that period of time yes we have to we have to operate outside of hatching season okay and that was from both uh Division of Wildlife and Fisheries and agsp they had similar comments on our original submitt to all the Departments so they're in agreement on the window in which this work needs to occur okay and I I think I read and I know this is more on the Brookline side that you that your bank work you expect will reduce sedimentation are you also doing work to improve the storm drains or is that needed well the improval to the storm drains will be the removal of sediment from the structure that is currently sunken or you know not operational um because it's so much of an unknown what the condition of the pipe is because it's buried um you know the town is is to improvements once we determine what condition the you know what condition the pipe is there's clearly not a head wall or something that currently exists um so as soon as that is Unearthed uh we do hope to restore it to a condition that it will function as as intended that it has not for you know 10 or more years okay there so there there's only one storm grain going there's only one there's only one outfall on the brook line side and then there's one outfall on the Boston side and the one on the Boston side is appears to be in fine shape okay and I was interested in the comment from uh Tom Brady that to expect it or you know potentially a change in water level could you just explain what that is so the the current Outlet let's call it you know is the um goes underneath the culverts go underneath the bridge and um you know the joke that I made when we had the site visit was that the only the only thing that's maintaining the current water level is the debris and so in order to maintain uh a more reasonable or a a better ecological environment for the species that live there we are proposing an outlet control structure that will maintain the appropriate like historic water levels of the pond there's currently nothing like if all the debris were to be removed we would end up with a a stream instead of a lake and so this is this is to create a more robust um you know improved environment for the species that live in this Pond to keep it a pond instead of a stream I see and is that that's part of the permitting you've been doing at the state level probably yeah it has been and it's been one of the it's been made clear to the different agencies that we worked with that um you know we are just one cleaning of a debris away from this this not being upon and so they've they've been supportive of our effort to create an outlet control structure here um including D waterways uh who we just met with the other week okay um I think that answers my questions I think we'll want to acknowledge the time of year restriction in the special condition I I our our general and I think chair Parker hinted at this but our general inclination is is to get all the information from your other reviewers not chapter 91 but um so that we don't have to come back for amendments and so forth um but that's all for me okay thank you um and on page 10 of the noi it says um no work will occur between November 15 to March 15 I think that contradicts what was said before so if that's not correct it needs to be um corrected in the um noi we can amend that I believe that's that's a typo okay okay okay Elena um anyone from the public raise their hand I'm not seeing any raised hands and we also didn't receive anything in the inbox um and apologies I I didn't mention this earlier but uh the other item that we would uh recommend here here is a special condition for any additional invasives removal uh to anything beyond uh hand pulling and cutting would require the proponent to um submit to commission staff uh the herbicide application approval okay sounds good okay so with the um and Elena I don't know if you um outlined this or not but I know that you had a discussion with d about best practices uh and um what you discussed was um not issuing an conditions until we see the water quality CT because that could change um the way we view the project yeah it um it's that's what it sounded like they didn't provide a direct recommendation but they did want to flag specifically that um there are you know a number of ways that the project could have to change uh through these other review processes so it is uh up to the commission what their preference would be um if they want to see more information and uh try to make sure that the the plans that are permitted now are the plans that have been reviewed and approved by everyone else uh again the closing it and issuing an order of conditions now runs the risk of potentially having to come back for a a modified either an amended order of conditions or potentially a new noi okay I think we'd also like to see the uh most recent meepa certificate uh as well uh before we issued an order of conditions um Lee or um Sam or actually Alex did you want to um respond to that approach I mean I think that is fine I mean I will say that I I'll send along the meepa certificate um but everything mentioned in that certificate is fairly positive um I feel that you know through the through the process you know we've gone we've been put in front of a lot of agencies who have all responded you know pretty positively to the project um and we did address you know all the comments um so I I mean I would obviously prer that we we close the hearing tonight um but understand if that's not something you feel you can do at this time yeah yeah I mean and and I go back and forth on this we talk about this a lot I mean d did comment on this um noi to us uh and so functionally um the comments that we receive from d for this should be no different than what they um gave to meepa or resolved through meepa but um I think we can all acknowledge it's sometimes there are um different perspectives uh within the agency uh so you don't always get the same same opinion from the same reviewer or I mean from different re reviewers or different regions um and I think the the really important one here we'd like to see is the water quality sir uh so uh that's why I was asking you when you expect to get that and I don't think you'd be able to proceed without it anyway so I don't think we'd be delaying you uh if we wanted to wait to see the water quality sir does that make sense yeah that makes sense okay I'll just note I I think you gave us you know thorough answers to all our questions so this is just a matter of seeing the final information and then we we wouldn't need a hearing of this like their detail again right right yeah no I agree thank you thank you for clarifying that okay okay with that I would um entertain a motion to continue the hearing so moved so moved okay uh commissioner con I commissioner Richmond I uh commissioner Herpst I and I vote I so that's uh carries for nothing okay thank you very much appreciate it thank you thank you to the commission good night thank you good okay um before we go into the next one uh who are we goingon to have for the rest of the hearing uh commissioner Conan do you have to leave I would like to if that's okay chair Parker okay um Comm commissioner um Richmond you're on for the rest of the evening correct yes okay yes thank you okay and you're excused thank you very much good luck with everything thank you okay thank you take care okay next item on the agenda is notice of intent for D file number 00 61988 and Boston file number 20231 3 from use environmental Consulting on behalf of 581 alh Development LLC for the proposed Redevelopment of a pave parking area with a mixed use residential and Commercial development located at 579 American Legion Highway Ros Andale resource areas are 25 foot um Riverfront Area 25 foot Waterfront area 100 foot buffer to Inland Bank this has been continued from the April 3rd 2024 hearing who's here on behalf of the applicant Mr chairman um I'm here Tom Hughes with Hughes environmental Consulting uh here on behalf of the applicant for 79 American Legion um I think we can get through this pretty quickly uh we at our last hearing we just had a few follow-up issues which um which we've addressed uh real quickly going through them on landscape there was an issue of you know would we be willing to put seed onto bare slopes I've identified a seed mix that will do well in a um in a fairly sort of mineral-based soil like uh like what we have here it's actually for dry sights but the way the water runs down the slope so quickly to get into the the stream um the upper Parts tend to be fairly dry in that area so I think it will do well it also incorporates Rye which is uh which is quick growing um we also agreed we would add uh jute um or another natural erosion control blanket but no uh no photo degradable elements to it so none of the that plastic webbing it would all be a uh a natural fiber um erosion control matting over that seed in places where it makes sense to do so um and then we added a provision uh to our final planting that prior to putting the plants in the ground we will lay them out we had said we would do this but we put it in writing in the letter that we would um lay them out invite Water and Sewer to come we would then adjust locations in the field to make sure that we had nothing in the way of the water and sewer operations folks uh and then we would put them in the ground um we uh clarified a couple things in the omm we added the pervious patio um we double checked our checklist for the frequency of inspections to make sure that was all good and uh we took out some of the optional language in the onm and made it more you know shs as opposed to shoulds um and then uh we responded to the uh the letter from the neighborhood group and really there were only a handful of um things in their letter that had anything to do with the conservation uh the the they had a question about confirmation of the resource area boundaries um and I knowe that these resource area boundaries are still valid under the order of conditions issued for the prior uh permit at uh or the current permit at 581 on top of that it's a really obvious bound boundary the uh the bankful conditions because of the way the water is so flashy in this section it's essentially a very obvious sort of scour layer and and the vegetation is a dramatic change from where the water flows and where it doesn't flow there uh so it's a really obvious uh boundary as well um there was also a uh a site visit where City staff have seen this as well um and then they had questions about Building height Shadow daylight impacts on the brook Etc and um and they included uh questions about storm water and hydrology and uh I noted that you know our filing includes a complete storm water report um we have engineered our storm water um the other elements looking at Shadow and Building height and all those um really aren't relevant for this site and in fact really it's it's a fairly shady area to some extent because of the tree camp but um the more shade the better because it reduces the uh the heat of any runoff although as I noted at our last hearing we're taking all of this water and putting it into an infiltration system between the patio and the um and the storm water system with the dryw so we're actually cooling the the urban runoff uh which to me in addition to the to the sort of treatment of the storm water for its water quality uh cooling it off uh is significant there was one other issue the um that John Sullivan had noted that we would need Church permission to tie into that drain pipe uh because it wasn't owned by water and sewer we approached the church the initial feedback was that they were uh not inclined to grant that okay so what we have done is we um we updated the plan and that overflow pipe now ties into uh the head wall and that um that should be visible if uh it's not quite as visible as i' would like it to be but it it runs as a diagonal from the structure right over to that head wall um and so we we rerooted that so that's that's it the other thing we did get to EP comments after we sent in that letter and um they were reading the noi as saying that we were altering Banks so we we answered that question and clarified that uh that we are actually only altering buffer zone to bank and we clarified that and then we did a quick Redline strike out in the um narrative to put some explicit language to that effect to make it clearer um the method of debris removal um generally uh as was similar when we talked about 581 um and I did put again a sentence into the narrative in Redline strikeout on this the removal is by hand or um if it's too heavy to Handle by hand uh it would be with equipment operating from the uh flat up above reaching down either with a bucket and thumb not digging but just to grab things and lift them up or using a chain with people on the slope kind of guiding that but uh there would be no excavation in the in the slope uh towards the water at all um and uh there was a question about whether or not we were um meeting stormw stand to the maximum extent practical and as I read it we're we're designed to treat storms up to a 100-year event we've got 80% TSS removal we're uh collecting and infiltrating roof runoff and and site runoff so I think that's pretty good for maximum extent practicable so um so we've we've uh issued our response to the D comments I'm really comfortable with with what we've done I think it's a good project um and I'm happy to answer any questions from the commission or address any uh butter concerns that come up okay great thank you Tom um so quick question um we don't have um final D comments back though right you've responded to their comments and waiting for their final comments they don't typically get do a back and forth It's typically a a one-off they they give you comments you address them um if they even write comments and then you provide the the information um and if it's you know if you're on the edge of your seat you sometimes try to call them and Hound them for additional feedback but um it's not a it's not a back and forth back and forth iter iterative process with d it's a oneoff set of comments you address them and it's um it's really sort of on the commission to determine you know based on de's comments and our response whether you're comfortable with how that all sort of goes down as it relates to the performance standards okay have we seen the comments and uh your response uh yes the the comments um came from DP the the later in the afternoon that I sent in the the letter and I addressed these by email um yesterday but I do want to note that all of these things all of the things that during my response were discussed at the last hearing um it's just really clarifying detail okay and then on the uh perious um pavers being added to the um updated on andm no what was it added to I'm sorry I'm sorry hold on the patio has been added to stormwater report narrative and checklist could you direct me to that I'm like frantically searching for oh so so if you you have to go way to the end of the storm water report where there's the there's an onm checklist and in fact if you if you're in the PDF it's easiest just to search for the word patio um and if you want I can do that on my computer and see if I can give you a page I mean it's pretty simple but it just it was it was not included in the uh it was not included in the original onm so there was no Assurance of of Maintenance so it's in there now and it is okay yeah I didn't get it I get a bunch of ads there's a permeable pavers uh technical spec sheet that's on page 83 of 123 of the PDF yep um okay then there's another section on 80 another thing on page 84 and then I believe it's included now in the checklist for inspection okay fantastic thank you I will look at this while I go to Elena um and ask her about her feelings about um uh the DP Comon issue that I brought up also commissioner herps um interested in her um perspective on that thank you Elena absolutely so yeah my understanding based on my conversation with d is that um it's true they might just not have additional comments they usually don't respond back and say that the supplemental materials are adequate I do know that um as of about 450 today they hadn't reviewed the supplemental materials so the question here would not so much be getting approval or you know sign off or anything like that from d on the supplemental materials but more so just ensuring that there aren't additional comments based on the uh provided responses okay thank you what else do you have on this uh that was that was really my main flag here okay thank you um misser long yeah um I appreciate the applicant getting back to us about some of our comments and the additional landscaping and notes on the uh previous pavers and the maintenance so um all my questions were answered fantastic thank you um commissioner Richmond yeah I I um maybe I'm the only one who doesn't understand this but I do I understood that the the church has said no and your solution was to put it where um so the pipe would run to the head wall and essentially um drop the water right into the brook um and that's and and keep in mind when that happens is after all of the capacity of the infiltration system has um has filled up so it's not going to flow all the time so when it does flow the brook is pretty much going to be at its high FL flow stage anyway and it will just serve to go in and oxygenate the water it's already gone through treatment um a lot of it is roof runoff uh so it's it's clean before treatment anyway so um so it's just instead of going into the brook where you don't see it in a pipe it's going into a brook in a similar fashion but out of the head wall and out of the head wall and I mean if it's if there's um as we've had this spring a lot of rain and stuff like I mean I'm I'm just it it's completely uncontrolled correct no no it's it's it's completely controlled actually so when it rains you know the first inch of rainfalls right it goes in the system it's not even close to full it's some of the water is actually infiltrating right into the patio right into the soil then it goes into the train of of the treatment unit and then the dryw and all of that has to fill up it's infiltrating while it's filling up so it's not like a bucket filling up with water it's like a bucket with a bunch of holes in it filling up with water and that all of that has to be exceeded and by the time that's happened the Canterbury Brook will be flowing about as high as you see it ever flowing and the water then comes out of all of the treatment train it's already gone through particle separator you know cleaning of of of the water and then it goes in if it's just an overflow so that the system fills up uh it has a place to go okay and I'm just trying to understand so but when it was first designed you thought it needed to go a different way so I'm just trying to understand whether this is just as good um better um you know how come this wasn't the original design um so the engineer saw a pipe within a Boston Water and seur easement and it was a a shorter shot and less material to drill through to sort of core through to put a pipe through it was just a it was sort of more of a typical uh overflow route but it turns out water and S doesn't own the pipe it's in the easement but they don't own the pipe right so we we can't do that so this is very similar but instead of dumping the water where you don't see it going into the the pipe but it's the same thing it's it's coming out um above the flow and dropping into the flow um that would happen but it happens you know we come up to the back of the head wall core through the head wall and the pipe sort of just sticks out of the head wall and and drops the water down into the brook there but like I said that's not going to happen when in a lowf flow environment it's only going to happen in a high flow environment okay and is that pipe going to present any Hazard to anything as it sticks out there no no it's not really sticking out very far it's it's just coming through the head wall so water just kind of Pours Down so in response to perhaps my in Artful question this is just as good as what you did before it just takes a little more doing as you do the construction yeah I actually there's a part of me that thinks it's better because it's visible okay right whereas if we stick a pipe into a pipe and you can't see anything you never see what's happening so okay to some extent you know it sees the light of day so to speak okay all right well thank you very much those answers are helpful thank you commissioner hers yeah I think my questions are answered and I think that is pretty much accurate with the um so um the one you know thing that I can't evaluate is is whether that meets the storm water standards as much as possible but I think um I'll trust that commissioner Sullivan has reviewed that adequately so nothing more from me okay thank you so where does that leave us Ellena I'm sorry um you said that you're still expecting D to um get back to you one way or the other as to whether they have comments or not um I my understanding is that I might have to reach out to them to confirm that they have reviewed the revised materials and confirm that they have no further comments they might not proactively say that they have no further comments um but at this point it's still possible for them to have further comments on the supplemental materials okay uh commissioner commissioner herps when you were agreeing um about D um what were you agreeing to that um they may never come back to us or that uh we should wait for them oh you're muted I'm sorry sorry I I mean Ellen has had the actual conversation but yes my sort of presumption would be along what Mr Hughes had to say which is they they say what they have to say and it's up to us to make something of it um but because Ellen has had a conversation that may be different okay so I'm on the fence here Ellena help me out um about what motion they call for um it's so as far as facts go they haven't reviewed their revised materials so it's possible that they'll still have comments on the revised materials that's I mean yeah that that's that's really the the main concern that I have here is that they haven't a chance to look through them so Mr chair would you like a motion to continue the hearing uh based on that yes hey Mr Shar this is Adam Burns project oh man y Adam did you want to say something I did but you already took the motion I still able to speak yeah y okay hey guys uh Adam Burns project proponent uh with Tom Hughes here having some camera troubles otherwise I'd be on camera but technical difficulties and so to speak um I just wasn't sure Tom if you wanted to share what were the D comments and what did they relate to and would they have any bearing on the decision if they had further comments on those items well I I did actually walk through those those comments I mean the one thing I will add uh Mr chairman is is I tend to speak to EP um I I'm not only a consultant but I have been a regulator in the past I've been with both mass and mainte um I tend to think that I tend to these are the types of comments that um I believe we we've addressed and I'm not overly concerned about um further questions or comments being to to the level that would trigger them to intervene in the project um but you know if if D indicates that they are going to review these materials and then give us uh you know assurance that they're satisfied there's always something nice about having that but um but I don't think in this case that's that's necessary I mean there's there's keywords that always end up in a comment that um you can kind of tell when they are um they have a heightened concern and the fact is that you know when I when I kind of said we've improved storm water and the and the whole storm water standard um you know we're treating up to the 100-year storm we're handling up to the 100-year storm and providing 80% TSS removal I mean that's basically a new development standard right there so we can't really do much more than that um so I'd be very comfortable if the commission wanted to go forward um and close it issue but I would also defer if if if there are commission members that are um concerned and would want to wait the two weeks I mean I I I think my client would prefer to to just move forward but um you know I will defer ultimately defer to the commission on it but um but I'm very comfortable with how we've responded to these comments and the nature of the comments themselves and I think that the questions about the work on the Bank go away because we're not working in the bank okay okay so why don't I do this um I'll um uh entertain a motion to close the hearing and let's see what happens want me to withdraw my motion first oh I didn't know you actually made it I thought we were just discussing it no I I moved in I I was draw okay do we have anyone who who would in face of the withdrawn motion anybody who would um put forth a motion to um close the hearing and issue the order conditions I'll move to close to hearing do we have a second second thank you okay commissioner long hi commissioner Richmond I uh commissioner herst hi and I vote I so that carries four nothing okay thank you all right thank you very much and have a great night everyone thank [Music] you so last time I'm making a motion for you Mr chair you know I was confused you have to excuse me I get confused easily um okay next item on the agenda is notice of intent for d fall number 0061 990 and Boston F number 2024 d015 from foro Associates on behalf of the Massachusetts Port Authority for the repairs associated with an emergency certification for a sinkhole located at 256 marginal Street in East Boston resource areas are land subject to Coastal storm Flowage 100 foot buffer to Coastal Bank um who's here on behalf of the applicant hi chair Parker this is Erica Fraser hi Erica who else um we have with us tonight Ann legassi and Marshall Greenland from Boston haror Shipyard and Marina and we also have Chris Bush and Pam Carnaval from massport okay and I think um you are aware of my um grave concerns uh regarding the local ordinance and the exemption that um that you your client and massport um have asserted in this um in this matter um so I understand that you didn't fill out a u Boston um noi form uh and uh notice wasn't given uh to a Butters within 300t so um and Chris I don't know we can talk about the project but I thought uh we should get this out of the way um uh beforehand uh get it all out on the table um Chris I don't know if you want to say anything uh but I've read the case law that you presented I've talked to um uh I have a colleague or two who have served uh as Regulators uh for the state about this uh to make sure that um you know to um give me a reality check uh so I'm pretty pretty comfortable in saying that I don't think uh for a marina that Services uh private customers and is not doing their work uh for uh massport uh you know whether it be operating a parking garage or for um you know uh airport users uh or doing work uh for the airport itself um I just don't think that you know the activity that goes on at the marina is an essential uh or fulfilling an essential governmental function so I know you didn't come prepared with legal counsel so uh but I want to give you the opportunity to respond yeah understand the the concern um you know I know our our leadership at massport and legal council takes a very conservative approach to the enabling act and and for many many years has considered you know development maintenance operation leasing of of our Port Properties um for any purpose as as an essential governmental function under the enabling act um we've always considered where actions of our tenants are reasonably related to that that public purpose um that they are exempt from the local regulations I think particularly here where you know part of our mission is maintaining sustaining um you know DPA import properties uh where this tenant um is is doing exactly that and through the shipyard uh sustaining those those water dependent industrial uses um where um you know through these leases These funds are going back into um you know supporting the port the airport and those essential functions um that that more broadly uh Falls within again that essential governmental function uh realm and and under that that exemption so I mean that's that's sort of been the the message the standard followed to date but again as as uh responded to uh in the email um you know as part of of the filing um and you know the correspondence with commission staff shortly before the hearing you know happy to to follow up um with legal staff to to discuss this further okay and again I'm not going to um I'm not going to engage you I um think it's probably fair to engage with legal counsel at this point um but um you know um what you said I think there were some Fair points there I have to say I'm not convinced uh but um we'll just let this go for further discussion um so Erica um do you want to um give us an overview of so this is a after the fact noi corre um so do you want to give us an overview of the work that's been done yes um so Dei if you could please just move on to the the next slide I can get right into it thank you um so the emergency sht that we received on uh February 27th covered the work for back filling and repairing the sinkhole um and that work was complete as of I believe March 22nd um so the work that this noi was for for was the um excavation soil stockpiling and the trench that was dug in order to find the um electrical electrical conduit that had been damaged damaged next slide please so just as a reminder um the existing Wetland resource area at the um project site is land subject to Coastal storm Flowage and that includes both the AE Zone and the V Zone and um it is also within the 100 foot buffer to uh Coastal Bank next slide please so just as the recap um we were able to locate the concrete cap that had failed um and those are the images on the left the two images on the left and then the two images on the right show the area that was excavated um both around the sinkhole and the trench that had the um electrical conduent um next slide please and I'm actually going to turn this over to Marshall at the shipyard who's going to just go over the repairs um that occurred and and discussed through the the two sections that uh we prepared thank you Erica um yeah I'll go through this drawing quickly it chose the um kind of excavated and uh area where we had the the sinkhole um the note on the top left kind of points out where um the main issue turned out to be with which was um just a a concrete cap that uh seems to have failed and and opened uh pretty significant size uh Gap in um what we call the relieving platform um so excavated out found that problem uh also some of the sheets that are that are shown here uh had had deteriorated below the the level of the pier that had abided uh behind them so there was some some Phil loss there and um then the electrical conduit that was damaged when um essentially what with the fill loss there was undermining in the concrete and and asphalt uh caved in on it um so this is kind of generally what uh um it looked like when when we had it opened up and um and and then the eye beams there just carrying from the marina up here that the isn't uh shown in the picture uh next slide please so uh same picture just kind of noting the the fill and and the repairs that were done so starting on the top left um anchor to form to the disting uh grav concrete gravity wall there and uh uh poured concrete back over it to to do a kind of inine concrete repair to to that um to that wall um raised up uh put put sheets uh steel plates in uh in to raise up where the uh existing sheet piles had had deteriorated below the um below the pier that they have butt there and um and then on the top right uh just reformed a concrete cap that that had also failed running in the north south Direction um and repaired the uh replaced the marina wire uh repaired the conduit and uh covered incased it in concrete um and then and then back filled with the same fill that had been stockpiled um put a uh graded it with Crush Stone and um that's pretty much how it sits today waiting to be uh resurfaced yeah and I believe if we move to the next slide um we included some pictures of what the site looks like today do we have any stamp plans or something is is this it yeah this is all we have um we we weren't able to get uh engineer plans we did submit to the commission a statement from an engineer um who's on the call actually uh Brian cinin um who's who was able to go out to the site and confirm the um the work that had been completed but he can speak to um the work that was completed and but we weren't able to get stamp plans as there was no um engineered or design engineered um as part of this project yeah so I I went uh on site after the work was completed and um took some of these photos on the right here um and just made notes on my observations on what I could see um on this day so I noted like the limits of excavation um or the saw cut lines the stabilized gravel shown here um and took some measurements on the approximate extents of this area um and then wrote a engineer statement based on these observations and prepared a graphic um which I can pull up but um it generally shows the this area on a plan um but yeah I was just attesting to what I witnessed on on this day after the majority of the work was was performed okay the majority of the work what was performed after well I I guess all the work you you see here I'm not aware of any work that was performed after this no no work has been performed since the only remaining work um chair Parker is the um area would need to be paved with asphalt um to complete the cap um and it hasn't been done um yet but would need to be done this allowed um the the shipyard to monitor the the repairs for a month or longer than a month now but to allow a full title cycle to make sure that the repairs were sufficient okay um I just don't know what to do about this I've never seen this before so I'm going to be interested in what other Commissioners um say and Elena okay um guess it is what is are you finished Erica yep um all set the mitigation measures were um presented at our last hearing for the Emergency SE and this was just to confirm that they were all uh in place and that the only remaining work is for the area to be paved okay thank you um so Marshall uh last time we were in we talked about I see um and legassi on the line here uh she may have something to say about this um we talked about how this was the second time uh that work was done without notifying commission staff or applying for a permit um and I wanted to know what uh protocols you're going to put in place uh to ensure that um we don't keep on running into this issue so um would you like to speak to that um as far as yeah yeah thank you absolutely um I think since since that last call um we we've done a lot of work to uh assess these um kind of issues that uh that we have you know as as we try and kind of upgrade and repair this this uh site so um we we've spent a lot of time with with our team Port point and communicating with concom to um really explain the the type of work that uh a lot of these a lot of these common types of issues uh require and some of our uh planned work going forward and um so just past future past and future planed projects and um trying to predict unexpected and assessing you know what what the impact for uh needing to go to concom communicating with concom uh will be for all of those projects so um and then as far as as far as with our our team here um you know just meeting notifying everyone the process as far as um notifications before we start any work uh you know how things why this is uh why this is you know why why these certain items are required to go to concom you know explaining the buffer zones uh you know any types of work excavation anything else so um you know I think that we me included the whole team have um gotten a a much better understanding of that and um I think we're going to be back here in a few weeks to to discuss uh a lot of a lot of that work and kind of research that we've been doing uh for the past I guess couple months now since that last call and and how we uh can proceed and and hopefully um you know make longterm lasting repairs uh in in in the proper proper way going forward okay okay Erica um this entire site is within lcfs right the majority the yeah for the most part yes yeah so Marshall I think you understand you asked what what sort of work has to come before us it's basically everything right that's what we found yeah yeah okay um okay uh the other thing here is you're you're previewing uh coming attractions for um uh repairs needing to be done in the future um one thing we do want to make sure is that um the work isn't segmented um you know it would be good to know you know what you plan to do you know I don't know how far ahead you look over the next year as opposed to um you know coming and asking for administrative approval for you know a few hundred square feet of Paving here you know the next month and then coming back two months later for you know a couple hundred more square feet and then at the end of the year all these um smaller projects that don't really seem to be a big deal add up to um you know a critical mass yeah Parker we're actually um uh preparing a notice of intent for um to try and cover all of the work that we see within the next three years um working with Elena um to help guide us through that um and using some examples so it would be a general repair and maintenance um order of conditions that will try and um evaluate all the impacts that they could potentially have um so we're in the middle of preparing that um to allow us to work through these repair and maintenance with you okay I appreciate that and I appreciate the thought you're putting into it I just want to um mention that we you know we don't have a general permit process so for whatever work that you anticipate doing we're going to need a um you know level of detail uh as you would for an noi so in other words you know it's not like we're issuing a nip General permit um um it's going to have to be you know we're going to have to know the work the means the methods uh and then if you deviate from them you know you can come in and get an amendment to the order conditions but just want to warn you on that uh final point before I let this go uh and this is for Chris um one thing I would mention about our little jurisdictional um spat here is that um there is a process where uh projects like this uh that you know we're having a disagreement about um could file under the ordinance uh and if you disagree or there's uh an agreement with our decision um you're certainly uh can raise the jurisdictional um arguments after uh so I don't think by filing under the ordinance that it's a ifof facto um sorry to use that term uh it's it's an acknowledgement that um you have um uh that you have conceded um jurisdictional issues um Ellena what do you have on this yeah I um a lot of what I just wanted to know has been covered and my question was mostly about the paving so um I know that we're going to work to get the conditions uh finalized and then sort of proceed as usual even though this isn't after the fact noi with um I think the the prior to construction items things like that just so that it moves through the way we would with any other permit um but that was yeah the paving was my was my main question okay thank you uh commissioner long yeah thank you chair Parker um so not knowing a ton of the background or you know the legality of everything um I do think it's important that the commission um is able to you know assert its jurisdiction to the extent it deems is uh you know appropriate so I'm I'm not sure what the option is with the noi here before us tonight um whether we would continue and just ask for a Boston noi form for the next hearing or rather than closing the hearing tonight or um if we would close tonight and ask I don't maybe it wouldn't make sense to ask for a Boston noi form after closing um so I'm not sure what what the options are before us exactly yeah I think that's right I don't think um until we get the jurisdictional issue um till we get the jurisdictional issue um ironed out um we haven't got the proper filing or the proper posting notice at this point right yeah so I think um yeah given given what you've said in the background you've provided um you know I'm I think it's it's important that we get a Boston noi form for this before closing but that's all I have to say Okay commissioner Richmond uh yeah I have a question and I don't know if it goes to the project manager or to the engineer but um would there have been different alternatives to the repair that has already been done um in other words um it's it's been completed except for the paving and I guess since I I just don't know would there have been if it hadn't already been completed would there have been different ways to make the repair um you know it's with with with this um with the with the infrastructure here that that we're dealing with I think um you know there there's two paths that that we that we try and take and and and I think if if anyone's familiar with like with the project uh and some of our long-term goals here is is to to Really uh improve replace repair a lot of this um you know 100 plus Year Old Navy infrastructure so but in the meantime um it's you know we're we're what we try and try and do with with um somewhat regular uh issues and failures is replace it in kind as we're so repair it in kind as we're moving forward on uh our larger scale permitting and and uh Investments and Replacements so um I don't know how well that answers it other other than to say that on a long-term scale um full Replacements of this infrastructure will will will be the the better long-term solution um near term it's trying to to keep this all all uh operating with with the designs that that we have oh okay well I I'm not sure that did answer the question I because the um here here's the question I'll try to ask it differently and maybe the answer is the same U which is um you know if we had the hole in the ground the sink hole that that you had and it hadn't been repaired and there there was an noi on the right form and everything before the commission um you know would there have been different ways to repair that uh which might have been better practices or um you know different I mean in in other words it's it's done deal now and so whether or not the Conservation Commission could have considered um a better way to make that repair is sort of um moot um um other than to tell you to undo it uh so that's why I'm asking the question does it make any difference um that you know if you hadn't already done it would would it was there a way to do it better so I I think I can help um answer that as well so um we we did actually submit some of the old engineered plans um from the the way the relieving platform was built so the repairs were done in a way that would restore it to those original plans and I think for a near near-term solution would be to um repair it in a way that we know um has been existing um and we know we were able to locate the failure and repair it and bring it back to it what is ex existing condition and right now we are working with the shipyard and Engineers to find longer term solutions that will not result in hopefully um get rid of the the potential for sink holes to open at the shipyard um so these longer term Solutions but I think for timing purposes having an open sinkhole um is obviously dangerous and um I think the immediate repairs were necessary okay well I appreciate that answer I'm not sure that one answer my question either but I think probably um is I have just one more which is um you say that that they figured you figured out where the problem was and have you also determined that it is unlikely to happen again um that whatever caused the sink hole this time um is not going to cause another one 5T away or 8T away or somewhere away I can't necessarily say that with confidence I mean we are dealing with a shipyard that has been operating and the the infrastructure there is very old um so our our long-term solutions would be to fix these repairs and to make sure that they don't occur in the future but I can't say with confidence that you know our repairs would stop a sinkhole in another location okay thank you very much excuse me thank you um commissioner herbs I I don't have anything further at I share uh commissioner Long's uh comments about um getting having a proper filing um and and it I am glad to hear that uh we can expect um proper Anis in the future thank you great thank you um okay Ellena anybody from the public raise their hand I'm not seeing any raised hands and we also did not receive any emails okay thank you um so with that uh commissioner long I think uh this is your motion yeah I'd like to make a motion to continue this hearing we have a second second thank you commissioner long hi commissioner Richmond hi commissioner Herbst hi and I vote I that carries four nothing um one thing Erica uh Parting Shot here is um I can't guarantee how commissioner uh Sullivan is going to react to the plans that were presented tonight so um you should be in touch with um Elena about that he is um uh set on uh many occasions in the past uh stamp plans and only stamp plans so uh that might be uh a recur an issue here that's going to recur so thank you thank you thank you okay next item on the agenda is a request for an amendment to the original order of conditions for D file number 0061 1897 and Boston file number 1889 William J Boulevard in South Boston resource areas land subject to Coastal storm Flowage who's here on behalf of the applicant hi everybody Laura Krauss from beta group also with me today Sandy Libby from the Department of Conservation and Recreation fantastic we have something fun to talk about here it looks like it is pretty fun um uh so apologies for the typo on the first sheet here um but yeah this is just a a picture of the turtle that we are hoping to place at the Marine Park um so if you could go to the next slide please thank you so this uh image here shows and depicts the location of the project kind of at the Red Dot in the center there this is in the South Boston Neighborhood uh uh along the U Waterfront and the project is within land subject to Coastal storm Flowage but its distance from the coastal Beach is about 200 ft so we're pretty far inland from the uh the adjacent resource area so just land subject to Cal storm Flowage here the work the Amendments that we're proposing to the existing project are all outside of the Velocity Zone but they are within the AE Zone next slide uh so two amendments here and it looks like they got a little distorted on the slide so I apologize for that um but the first amendment is in the upper right hand corner there's an area that was supposed to be lawn um and we're carving out a small space of uh the stabilized aggregate material that mass uh that DCR uses it's a perious surface that has a um cor a a gravel course underneath it that allows for uh M for water to filter through with a uh a boulder to be placed with a plaque a dedication plaque and then over on the left corner another area that was proposed to be lawn similarly that area will be treated with the stabilized aggregate over gravel um there will be that uh lovely picture of the uh turtle that will be placed uh within this area on the uh stabilized aggregate um that turtle is currently painted prior to it being brought to the site the plan is to sand blast it remove the paint and it will will remain unpainted on the site uh also in the location there'll be two in this location there'll be two um concrete pads uh that will serve as the home for two of the um the benches on the site that totals about 24 square fet of impervious surface that was not previously approved as part of the project so we're here today to present this we you know the project is under construction now and Sandy can probably provide some more details on that if you have questions but um as the project is nearing completion DCR had wanted to add these two elements to the project and um we didn't want to come in front of you at the end of the project with a uh project that didn't fully comply with the plans so that's why we're here uh before you tonight so next slide and uh this shows uh the boulder a view of the boulder again um showing the port in place material and a snapshot of what the plaque is for as well as another look at the um turtle thank you that's it that's it any questions okay um pretty simple I have any but I like the turtle um Elena do you have anything on this nothing on this also a fan of the turtle okay Comm long do you like the turtle uh as long as it's native uh yes that's it for me thank you commissioner Richmond I I just have one question and that is why did you decide that you didn't didn't want grass um because we want to make the area accessible um so that's why um also it makes it a lot easier to maintain uh around the turtle and around the area Okay so but I as I understood one there were two places where you were substituting essentially um gravel it is it looks like is that what it is yes it's the interlocking a compacted aggregate stone dust and and and so there there are two places and one of them obviously as you've explained under the turtle what what was the reason for replacing the grass in the other one so the people could walk around the Boulder and and and get up to the plaque and read the plaque and and grass would be would get ruined if they did that I mean I'm not it will and it's also not ADA Compliant okay so this so this is to ensure ADA compliance and that's the reason for doing this that's the reason for doing the compacted aggregate around the features yes so everybody can have access to the benches and the and the um turtle and the plaque okay and um is there any difference um in what happens if children fall off the turtle since they're obviously going to climb on the turtle is there any difference as to I mean what that is that a a substance that is used in places where kids are going to be falling off of structures well this turtle is extremely low to the ground as you can see and and yes while people will touch it and maybe lay on it you're basically kind of laying on the ground it is not high off the ground it's not inside the playground area so it doesn't um have the poured in place rubber surfacing that we do underneath playground equipment okay um all right I understand everything you said but if you've ever been um in the Boston Public Garden and watch the kids climb on the ducklings you would understand that doesn't matter how close it is to the ground uh the kids are going to climb on it anyway so um that's the reason for my for my question and I understand if I understand what you said the reason to change grass to gravel uh is ADA compliance okay thank you y and and probably on the boulder too where the plaque is they'll probably climb on that and and and everything and um but um we have a lot of a great I hope you guys have seen that great playground that we have inside um the kids have been really enjoying it and all the different features in there great thank you commissioner Herbst no questions thanks okay Elena anybody from the public I see no hands and nothing in the inbox either thank you so with that I would entertain a motion to uh amend uh bordering conditions for flip the page too quickly um DP file number 0061 1897 and Boston file number 2022 d050 so moved you do we have a second this motion has to carry commissioner Herbst sorry I was muted I I've been motioning and seconding furiously for the turtle but okay thank commissioner long I commissioner Richmond I commissioner Herpst I and I vote I that carries four nothing okay thank you thank you so much have a good night okay uh there have been a number of continuances continued uh have been notice of intention phone number 00 61704 Boston file number 2020-7 D file number 00 61772 and Boston file number 202-10 DP file number 00 61961 and Boston file number 2023 51 and D file number 0061 987 and Boston file number 202 24-12 next item on the agenda is we will now begin our regular meeting and the first item on the agenda for a regular meeting is a request for a certificate of compliance for D file number 00 61774 for the demolition of a residential building and construction of a new multif family Residential Building located at 839 Saratoga Street East Boston resource areas land subject to Coastal storm Flowage Elena we have not received an update on this um if the commission will recall this has been on the agenda for a few hearings now and um we are still waiting for the updated materials so we would recommend continuing the vote for now okay so no action on this next item on the agenda request for a certificate of compliance for D file number 00 60955 for the construction of buildings five and six landscaping and utilities associated with buildings five and six and open space work located at 40 East Pier Drive in East Boston um what do you have on this since the last hearing we were able to uh re-review some of the materials and clarify a few of the questions that we had namely about the fish plate locations um upon reviewing the uh further materials we've determined that the project seems to have been done in compliance with the order of conditions which was issued um we also have noted for the uh property management team on site uh that they should be in touch with commission staff uh if there's uh work that's happening on the exterior of the building Landscaping things like that so um we think that that will lead to to more conversations and and just to make sure that everybody's on the same page about what needs to be a filing and what needs to be um a notification to us things like that so um based on that we would recommend issuing a certificate of compliance okay great I don't have any questions any Commissioners have any questions for Elena hearing none uh would entertain a motion to issue a certificate of compliance for D file number 00 60955 so moved second thank you commissioner long hi commissioner Richmond hi commissioner herps I and I vote I that carries four nothing thank you okay um administrative updates yes so we had a few updates um we wanted to flag that there is an administrative approval which we had processed for 170 squ F feet of concrete repair at 256 Marginal Street in E East Boston Boston Harbor ship ARA Marina uh both the request and the processed approv approval are in the drive folder for your review happy to answer any questions on that as well um I also uploaded the city's comments on the on um the city excuse me the city's comments on D's proposed revisions to the wetlands regs and chapter 91 regs as well as the storm water handbook for your review um we appreciate everybody who uh you know reached out to us with comments and and kept us in the loop on the way that they were participating in this as well and we're really um yeah just very thankful for the climate policy team at the city and the department because um they they were working really hard on this and uh it was really exciting to see everything come together uh sorry no go ahead um and then uh lastly just an update on an enforcement order which the commission ratified last month um it's the enforcement order which we issued to Chestnut Hill realy uh they were meant to reach out to us um well and actually also submit uh plans to us by April 29th and they have not done so so um we'll be likely checking in with the EP and and getting some guidance on what appropriate next steps would be on that um and that was the the project where there was a a seemed to be a lot of vegetation which was removed uh so we will be following up on that we'll keep you in the loop that's frustrating because um as I went through the uh reviewing the minutes from that meeting um we made it very clear to them that we needed something by April 29th um he was I the um I guess it was the property owners the owner rep was um uh trying to get us something in late spring uh so I thought the message got across but apparently it didn't so um please proceed with any sort of um escalation that the recommends thank you we will and um and actually just for for clarity sake believe we missed a call from him and then reached back out and then just heard nothing so that's where that stands yep y okay but theonis is on him so okay um is that it that's everything okay uh no conditions to um issue uh because we're still working through uh with DCR and so that leads us to the last item on the agenda which is acceptance of meeting minutes from April 3rd 2023 no 2024 and um April 17th 2024 I reviewed them um some very minor edits they're very well done someone like to make a motion to accept them so moved you have a second second thank you commissioner long hi commissioner Richmond I commissioner Herbst I and I vote ey that carries four nothing okay motion to adjourn by acclamation let's all go watch the Celtics if you're a Celtics fan good night thanks all you good night