Jennifer Doyle Breen from AECOM presented the project, explaining the delay in receiving a determination from the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program, expected by September 19. This delay prevented the commission from closing the hearing, yet it allowed for addressing public concerns raised during the previous meeting. Breen outlined three main points of concern: the choice of horizontal directional drilling (HDD) under the Saugus River versus placing the pipe on the General Edwards Bridge, detected lead levels near the project site, and potential impacts on vegetated sandy dunes.

Breen explained that four installation methods were considered: open trench, micro tunneling, bridge installation, and HDD. The first two methods were dismissed due to higher costs, longer duration, and greater environmental impact. The bridge installation option was rejected due to its replacement timeline, cost implications, and environmental impact. The existing bridge is scheduled for replacement in about nine to ten years, necessitating a temporary installation that would eventually need to be replaced again, doubling the project’s costs. Additionally, placing the pipe on the bridge would require disturbing the riverbed, creating environmental issues. The HDD method was chosen for its lesser environmental impact and reduced community disturbance.

Breen emphasized that the selected HDD route offered several advantages, including decreased distance of open cuts and minimal impact on the surrounding barrier beach system. This decision was supported by the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs and various agencies during the environmental impact report review. She also addressed concerns about lead levels, stating that while background levels of lead were present throughout the area, the project did not anticipate significant dewatering during construction. Any collected water would be tested for lead levels and managed according to regulatory standards if exceedances were found.

Addressing potential impacts on coastal dunes, Breen clarified that the project would not disturb naturally vegetated sandy dunes adjacent to the beach. Although the project area was mapped as a barrier beach and coastal dune, work would only occur in paved areas with minimal disturbance to grass areas in the right-of-way of Route 1A. Despite addressing these concerns, the commission could not close the hearing due to the pending decision from the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program, inviting further discussion if needed.

In addition to the Rice Avenue project, the meeting featured discussions on other topics, including a proposed infrastructure project and a driveway construction project. Members discussed a new pipe installation project connecting to an existing pipe on Route 1A, with assurances that there would be no traffic impacts. The choice of routing for the new pipe was questioned, with the response noting that the longer route was economically feasible due to construction sequencing and labor considerations.

Another topic was the ongoing work near the new fire station on Nara Road. Although not related to the commission’s current projects, some speculation arose about potential utility work associated with the fire station construction. It was revealed that the submitted plans were incomplete, lacking details about the resurfacing of the secondary driveway and the absence of a proposed French drain for water collection. The chair emphasized the necessity of a complete plan for consideration.

The meeting also addressed a notice of intent for a project on Avalon Street. A representative from Williams and Spages presented plans to replace an existing two-family, seven-bedroom structure with a five-story, twelve-unit building, featuring parking underneath and designed to meet flood elevation standards. The lot lies partially in land subject to coastal storm flowage, with specific performance standards due to poor soil conditions and shallow groundwater. The increase in impervious area was noted, but the overall change would result in only a negligible increase in runoff, with all runoff captured by a catch basin discharging through an easement behind an adjacent property.

The chair and other commissioners reiterated the importance of having complete plans on file to maintain accountability and ensure projects align with conservation standards. The next meeting was confirmed for the first Wednesday of October, where further reviews and discussions of the presented plans would occur.

Additional points included the approval of a notice of intent for a slab-on-grade construction with an existing stormwater management system and a request for an extension for Redgate Capital Partners regarding a multifamily residential project near Gibson Park. Both motions were unanimously accepted, with the commission expressing confidence in the projects’ compliance with conservation standards.