[0:00] Nico should join you too

[0:01] , just so

[0:02] you know.

[0:05] Great, it's already 6:30. Greetings to

[0:07] everyone. This is the

[0:09] Pier 44 commission meeting. I see

[0:13] Athena, Nico, Howie,

[0:15] and Cory are here. We hope

[0:19] that Tracy and Patrice

[0:20] can join,

[0:22] but I declare a quorum

[0:23] . Allow me to read

[0:27] our

[0:28] Diversity,

[0:29] Equity, and Inclusion

[0:30] (DEI) statement. The Citywater Harbor Redevelopment Advisory

[0:33] Commission

[0:35] strives

[0:36] to ensure a

[0:36] respectful environment

[0:37] during meetings. We

[0:39] ask all

[0:40] participants

[0:41] to communicate

[0:41] politely, even if

[0:43] disagreements arise. We

[0:46] value the participation of our

[0:48] community and want

[0:49] all participants,

[0:50] including the

[0:50] marginalized and

[0:52] minorities, to feel

[0:53] welcome and

[0:54] respected. We

[0:56] ask that

[0:57] our committee members and

[0:58] all attendees

[0:59] adhere to these

[1:00] standards to

[1:01] support and

[1:01] respect our

[1:02] community. Perfectly. I

[1:09] sent the minutes of

[1:10] the meeting from February 5th.

[1:14] Ahem. Can I get

[1:16] a proposal for

[1:17] approval? Athena,

[1:22] I support. Are there

[1:23] any discussions?

[1:26] All those in favor, say

[1:27] yes. Paul, could

[1:28] you please hold a

[1:29] roll call to

[1:30] make this official?

[1:31] Athena?

[1:32] Yes, "yes".

[1:33] Howie?

[1:34] I can't vote.

[1:36] I wasn't at the

[1:36] meeting.

[1:37] Actually, you can.

[1:39] Oh, okay. "By". "

[1:41] Yes". Field, "for". Nico? "

[1:44] Yes."

[1:45] Great,

[1:46] approved then. Ahem. So,

[1:52] we're in an

[1:52] exciting time for

[1:54] Pier 44 Park. We... We're

[2:00] going to the board

[2:01] of selectmen next Tuesday for

[2:03] CPC funding approval. We

[2:06] will be at the town

[2:07] meeting on October 19th for

[2:08] this approval. If

[2:12] this is approved, we

[2:13] can move

[2:14] forward with tenders and

[2:15] direct

[2:16] construction. So we're

[2:18] really excited about this.

[2:21] Today we have a series of

[2:22] updates. We'll start

[2:25] with Corey and a review of the

[2:26] cost estimate. I

[2:31] just want to, before

[2:32] Corey turns on

[2:33] the microphone and gets on the

[2:34] line, express my

[2:35] sincere gratitude to Corey.

[2:41] She has worked with us

[2:42] from the beginning and

[2:43] has done a great

[2:44] job helping

[2:45] us develop this

[2:46] project and

[2:47] communicate with

[2:48] our citizens and

[2:49] people in the community. And we wouldn't be where

[2:54] we are

[2:55] without Corey's great work

[2:56] .

[2:58] Oh, thank you, Paul. I still don't

[3:03] know why my

[3:04] camera isn't working, but I

[3:06] hope everyone can

[3:07] hear me.

[3:09] Yes, we hear.

[3:10] OK. So, so that we

[3:15] have clarity on

[3:16] where we

[3:16] are with the

[3:17] valuation. We

[3:24] received our

[3:25] final engineering and

[3:26] technical

[3:27] specifications from the

[3:28] engineer and

[3:28] landscape

[3:29] architect, the

[3:30] design team. And we

[3:40] used that to

[3:41] get a professional

[3:42] cost estimate from

[3:43] Alana, a firm that

[3:44] specializes in

[3:45] such estimates. The

[3:53] total estimated

[3:55] cost was

[3:56] over 6 million. With a

[4:03] design that protects from

[4:04] the sun and a dock for

[4:05] small boats. As well as

[4:11] all other

[4:12] elements of

[4:14] landscaping and

[4:14] planting.

[4:19] Embankment and all

[4:21] other planned

[4:22] facilities. When we

[4:29] approached the CPC, they did

[4:30] not support such

[4:31] large expenditures. So

[4:38] we had to

[4:39] revise the project and

[4:40] remove some things

[4:42] to reduce the price.

[4:46] The first thing we

[4:47] removed was the

[4:49] sunshade. Unfortunately,

[4:58] the savings from the above

[4:59] -ground part of

[5:00] the structure are less

[5:01] than what we would

[5:02] get from the

[5:03] foundation. Therefore,

[5:16] there is no point in building the

[5:17] foundation for this

[5:18] structure,

[5:19] hoping that

[5:20] later we can

[5:21] find funding

[5:29] to install its

[5:30] above-ground part. And

[5:35] this is a kind of design

[5:40] that required significant

[5:46] engineering

[5:46] calculations to

[5:47] support the

[5:48] structure, to

[5:49] design the foundation for it

[5:50] . So, to

[5:58] put the project up for

[5:59] bid, we need to

[6:00] redo the design, and

[6:01] the engineers need to

[6:02] redo the

[6:03] foundation. Then it

[6:12] doesn't have to be as

[6:13] massive as to

[6:14] support a large

[6:15] structure on top.

[6:21] This means that we

[6:23] cannot go to the auction

[6:24] with the plans we

[6:25] have now. We

[6:31] need to go back

[6:33] and ask

[6:34] the engineers to rework

[6:35] certain parts of

[6:36] the design. It will probably

[6:41] cost around

[6:50] $100,000 to

[6:51] rework part of the

[6:52] design, as well as

[6:53] rewriting the

[6:54] technical

[6:54] specifications. So,

[7:09] this is the current state with the

[7:10] cost estimate, but

[7:12] overall, without the

[7:14] solar structure, and without

[7:15] some plantings and

[7:17] landscaping elements, we

[7:18] can reduce the amount

[7:20] to 3.8 million. The CPC

[7:31] expressed full

[7:32] support for this

[7:33] decision. They

[7:37] voted unanimously to

[7:38] support

[7:39] construction at that

[7:40] price. So we currently

[7:43] have these

[7:44] results regarding

[7:45] our funding.

[7:51] So, at the city

[7:52] meeting, the city must

[7:53] approve the

[7:53] CPC's recommendation to

[7:55] spend these

[7:56] funds on

[7:56] construction. I expect

[8:02] to receive some

[8:03] grants. I

[8:06] applied for several of

[8:07] them. Em. One of them

[8:11] is called the

[8:13] Massachusetts

[8:14] Park Grant. It. I forget what the

[8:21] park's acronym stands for, but it's

[8:22] $100,000. So,

[8:26] hopefully, we

[8:27] will get this grant.

[8:31] Of course, we don't know

[8:32] for sure, but a

[8:33] representative of this

[8:34] program came

[8:35] to the facility. Paul and I

[8:38] met her on

[8:39] site, and she showed

[8:40] great

[8:41] interest in the

[8:42] project. So there are a

[8:45] few other grants that

[8:46] I can

[8:47] apply for or have already

[8:48] applied for. One of them is a

[8:52] grant for travel and

[8:53] tourism in

[8:54] Massachusetts. It

[8:57] is about

[8:59] $250,000. There is no

[9:02] news about

[9:03] him yet. The other

[9:08] grant is "Massachusetts One Stop,"

[9:10] and it's

[9:11] about $750,000.

[9:17] If we get

[9:19] any of these

[9:20] grants, it would be a

[9:21] big help, but

[9:22] we don't know exactly

[9:23] when or if we will get

[9:24] them at all. Let's keep our

[9:29] fists together.

[9:32] Yes, and regarding the

[9:33] financial plan:

[9:34] I think everyone knows about it

[9:35] , but for

[9:36] the public who

[9:37] joins us:

[9:38] the grants received

[9:40] will reduce the amount of

[9:40] funding from the CPC.

[9:44] Dollar for dollar.

[9:47] Yes.

[9:49] And the estimate, Corey, does it

[9:50] include a bridge and

[9:51] ...a floating dock for

[9:56] kayaks, non-motorized

[9:57] boats, etc.? So, this

[9:59] ...

[10:00] Yes, it includes. So that's

[10:01] included.

[10:02] Support for this

[10:04] too.

[10:05] Yes, this is included in

[10:06] the estimate. Em. We

[10:12] may still

[10:13] have to

[10:14] reach out to

[10:15] the community

[10:16] for donations,

[10:17] like for park

[10:18] benches or something like that.

[10:24] In the past, the city has

[10:25] always been willing to

[10:26] respond to

[10:27] requests to install

[10:28] memorial benches.

[10:34] I think if we

[10:35] encourage people to

[10:36] donate money to the

[10:37] benches, they

[10:38] will respond quite

[10:39] well.

[10:42] Yes, we could also

[10:43] make name

[10:44] bricks. This is a great

[10:46] way to support

[10:47] the project and recognize

[10:48] the patrons. Corey and

[10:50] Paul, can I

[10:51] step in for a

[10:52] moment? I think, uh,

[10:54] one of the things that

[10:55] Corey outlined, which

[10:57] was a very important

[10:58] point, but I

[10:59] just wanted to

[11:00] support this—this is the

[11:01] foundation for the uh

[11:02] canopy. Uh, you know, I, I

[11:07] , I reluctantly

[11:08] agree with Corey that

[11:09] while I would have

[11:10] preferred to have

[11:12] this foundation

[11:13] remain in the plan, uh

[11:14] , in the hope of

[11:15] creating something in

[11:16] the future, I do

[11:17] agree with Corey that

[11:18] removing it right

[11:20] now, first of all,

[11:21] significantly reduces

[11:22] the cost of the plan

[11:23] before the vote.

[11:27] This will help us

[11:28] hope that we

[11:29] will cross the finish

[11:30] line and build the

[11:31] park. Uh, if, if

[11:33] we actually find ourselves

[11:34] in a situation in

[11:35] the future where

[11:36] we can consider, uh, an

[11:38] expensive addition

[11:39] like a canopy, or if

[11:40] we can find other

[11:42] hidden ways to

[11:43] do it,

[11:44] alternative ways,

[11:45] I think that, uh, you know

[11:46] , later on, first of all,

[11:47] if we have

[11:49] that surplus or that

[11:50] opportunity, we

[11:51] might be able to,

[11:52] you know, redo the

[11:53] foundation as well. Another

[11:55] thing is that in the future,

[11:56] if we do

[11:57] consider

[11:58] alternatives, they

[11:59] may still not be up

[12:00] to the

[12:01] foundation that we are

[12:02] going to lay.

[12:03] So perhaps it would have been

[12:04] designed with

[12:05] too much or

[12:06] too little

[12:07] safety margin, and it makes

[12:08] more sense

[12:08] to remove it now.

[12:10] So that was something I

[12:11] really wanted to see,

[12:12] but I think Corey is

[12:13] absolutely right about

[12:14] that. So, I just

[12:15] wanted to support this

[12:16] point. One more thing,

[12:17] Corey, you can write

[12:19] me down on my

[12:19] memorial bench

[12:20] right now.

[12:21] Okay, great. Thank you,

[12:23] Nico.

[12:23] Yeah, I would be

[12:24] interested, I'm sure,

[12:26] like you said, Corey,

[12:27] a lot of people in the

[12:28] community, they'll be

[12:29] very popular.

[12:30] Just for the record,

[12:32] I want to mention that

[12:34] Tracy Johnston has joined us.

[12:36] Thank you. Sorry. I have

[12:38] , I have a

[12:39] huge problem

[12:40] at home right now. So I'll be

[12:42] leaving the

[12:43] meeting periodically because my

[12:44] outdoor

[12:45] air conditioner unit sounds like it's about to

[12:47] explode. So,

[12:49] be careful and

[12:51] thank you for I

[12:51] apologize for this

[12:53] .

[12:53] Everything is fine. Uh, thank you. Are

[12:57] there any more questions for

[12:58] Corey regarding item

[12:59] five on the budget? Does

[13:02] anyone from

[13:03] the public have any

[13:04] questions about this?

[13:05] It's nice to see, uh, the

[13:06] people who

[13:07] joined us tonight

[13:08] . Um,

[13:13] I think you should

[13:15] raise your hand so I

[13:16] can see you, but, uh,

[13:18] okay, I don't see anyone

[13:19] who wants to, so Tracy,

[13:20] Corey, you touched on the

[13:21] trading schedule,

[13:23] but maybe

[13:24] elaborate on that a little bit?

[13:31] Of course. When we

[13:34] get approval

[13:36] from the city council,

[13:37] which we will definitely

[13:38] get by a huge

[13:39] majority, I'm

[13:40] sure. Um, we'll

[13:45] have to

[13:46] go back to

[13:46] the engineers and

[13:47] landscape

[13:48] architects from the

[13:49] design team to

[13:50] just

[13:51] rework that

[13:52] part of the design a little bit. Um, and

[13:56] it will take them some

[13:58] time to do that. Uh

[14:03] , it won't take them

[14:04] long, but,

[14:05] you know, we have to

[14:07] do it. Um, and so once

[14:15] we have the

[14:16] final

[14:17] design ready without the shadow

[14:18] construction, we

[14:19] can either

[14:20] try to put

[14:21] it out for a final

[14:22] cost estimate to

[14:23] see what stage we're at

[14:24] , or

[14:25] prepare a tender package

[14:27] . Um, and at

[14:33] this point we'll have to

[14:34] bring in an

[14:35] OPM, which is called a

[14:36] project manager

[14:38] from the owner. This is

[14:42] required by the state

[14:43] for procurement for

[14:44] projects costing

[14:45] over a million

[14:46] dollars. And, um, this

[15:00] project manager

[15:01] will act on our

[15:02] behalf with any

[15:03] contractor, they

[15:04] will manage the

[15:05] bidding process, and

[15:06] we will have to

[15:07] advertise it. I'm just

[15:18] thinking out loud

[15:19] about the

[15:19] procurement process for this.

[15:21] So it's quite difficult

[15:22] . We will have to

[15:26] announce this in the

[15:27] central registry

[15:28] and in the newspaper. So we have to

[15:30] put

[15:32] this in multiple places.

[15:33] So it

[15:34] will probably take a month

[15:36] or two to start

[15:37] getting

[15:38] offers. Um, but

[15:41] once we do that,

[15:43] we can we can

[15:47] finally start

[15:48] scheduling

[15:49] construction. You know,

[15:55] we probably won't

[15:56] start any

[15:57] construction this

[15:58] year. Um, it'll probably

[16:02] be early

[16:03] next year.

[16:05] Okay, on that note,

[16:06] sorry to interrupt

[16:07] . Do we believe that

[16:09] the demolition

[16:10] will still be postponed to

[16:11] next year, or is there a

[16:12] chance that the demolition

[16:13] will take place in late

[16:15] fall or winter?

[16:20] Um, I guess it

[16:21] would depend on

[16:22] the contractor, but we don't

[16:23] want to pay for

[16:25] equipment mobilization more than

[16:26] once.

[16:29] Mhm.

[16:30] So, um, it probably makes

[16:32] sense to just do it

[16:33] all at

[16:34] once. Um,

[16:36] of course. I, in most

[16:38] cases, agree

[16:39] because I want

[16:40] this project to be

[16:41] completed quickly and, you know,

[16:43] started as early as possible

[16:44] . I think you're

[16:45] right about the

[16:47] performance agreement. The other

[16:50] reason I

[16:51] ask is simply

[16:53] that the Pier 44 building

[16:54] , until we close it

[16:55] for the needs

[16:57] of the project, is still a

[16:58] semi-functional

[16:59] structure

[17:00] used by various

[17:02] departments, especially the

[17:03] Recreation Department, FACTS,

[17:04] and others. And so I know

[17:10] that both of these departments

[17:11] will be very

[17:12] interested in

[17:13] what happens after

[17:14] the vote and how

[17:15] soon it happens

[17:16] so that they can

[17:17] understand whether

[17:17] they will have the

[17:18] space in the winter.

[17:22] So, I know we

[17:23] can't answer

[17:25] this today, but I

[17:26] just wanted to

[17:27] mention it. When we

[17:28] get to

[17:29] the vote,

[17:30] hopefully

[17:31] cross the finish

[17:32] line and start

[17:33] moving forward, I

[17:34] think these two

[17:35] departments will be very

[17:36] eager to know

[17:37] if they can

[17:38] hold classes

[17:39] indoors in the middle of a

[17:40] cold winter.

[17:42] Oh yes.

[17:44] So it's worth considering

[17:45] keeping the

[17:46] council office informed so that

[17:47] when people

[17:48] ask about the

[17:49] rental or schedule,

[17:50] they know if

[17:51] it can be planned.

[17:54] Yes.

[17:56] We had a good

[17:57] conversation with

[17:58] council staff

[17:59] about what they...

[18:04] Made a list of all the

[18:05] people, organisations and

[18:07] groups that

[18:07] use the

[18:08] leisure centre, I

[18:10] mean the community

[18:11] centre. The Pier 44 building,

[18:17] and they also took the

[18:18] next step by

[18:19] identifying

[18:20] alternative locations

[18:21] for them, other city

[18:22] facilities, so that no one is

[18:24] left without a

[18:24] space.

[18:29] Nika, I know Nika

[18:30] asked about

[18:31] the possibility of

[18:32] holding yoga at the

[18:33] Maritime Center.

[18:35] True.

[18:39] On days when it is not

[18:40] rented

[18:41] by the public, they are

[18:42] not very welcome there

[18:44] , even though it is city

[18:45] property. So I'm not

[18:49] sure if you

[18:50] just need to be

[18:51] aware of this.

[18:55] So, again, in

[18:57] previous

[18:57] discussions, all the

[18:58] staff

[18:59] have identified other locations

[19:01] for all the groups that are

[19:02] currently

[19:02] using

[19:03] the building on Pier 44. And

[19:09] of course, there will be other

[19:10] events that can be

[19:12] held on Pier 44,

[19:13] you know, on the waterfront and

[19:15] so on. So, we

[19:19] are mindful of that and

[19:20] want to minimize the

[19:21] impact on these groups

[19:23] as much as possible.

[19:26] And again, we

[19:27] got a good

[19:28] response from the

[19:28] advisory

[19:30] board staff on this. Uh,

[19:33] to wrap up the question,

[19:34] let's talk

[19:36] about the

[19:36] financing plan. Corey,

[19:40] Nico, and I attended

[19:41] several CPC meetings.

[19:45] Also had separate

[19:47] meetings with the CPC, the

[19:54] president, the vice

[19:55] president, and the

[19:57] CFO of the advisory

[19:58] board, and developed a

[19:59] plan, which the CPC

[20:00] unanimously approved

[20:01] , as Corey mentioned, whereby

[20:02] the city would

[20:04] issue promissory notes in

[20:05] anticipation of the bonds

[20:06] . So, it would be a

[20:12] loan for

[20:13] several years. Payments

[20:22] will be made by CPC,

[20:23] and therefore for such an

[20:24] expensive project we will

[20:25] spread them out over

[20:26] several years so that it does

[20:28] not exhaust all

[20:29] CPC resources for our

[20:30] project to the detriment of

[20:31] other worthy

[20:32] projects. And again

[20:39] , a lot of good

[20:40] work with the CPC, very

[20:41] creative, and also with

[20:44] City Administrator Nancy Holt and the

[20:45] advisory board. So,

[20:48] this looks like a

[20:49] good plan. As I

[20:50] said, unanimous

[20:52] approval from the CPC.

[20:54] CPC's obligations, as

[20:55] we have already said,

[20:56] will be reduced as

[20:58] funds are received from other sources

[21:00] , including other

[21:01] grants. So, this is what

[21:04] we're going to

[21:05] town meeting with in October

[21:06] . Um, Corey and Nico,

[21:09] do you want to add anything to

[21:11] that?

[21:14] I actually have

[21:15] nothing. I think you

[21:20] described it very well

[21:21] , Paul, and obviously

[21:23] it allows the city

[21:24] to put the entire burden of

[21:25] paying for this project

[21:26] on CPC in a different way,

[21:27] to spread it out, which

[21:29] allows the city to take

[21:30] it out of other accounts and

[21:31] not burden

[21:32] the city budget, which I

[21:34] think is a

[21:35] win-win for all of

[21:36] our residents and

[21:37] taxpayers

[21:38] because CPC has

[21:40] funding available, and there

[21:41] will be more in the future

[21:42] that we don't

[21:43] always have somewhere to

[21:44] spend it right away,

[21:45] so this is a good

[21:46] way to do it. And

[21:53] secondly, I think

[21:54] this approach

[21:55] allows CPC

[21:56] to spread the costs,

[21:57] which will result in

[21:58] a small additional

[21:59] interest compared to

[22:01] paying for the project

[22:02] upfront; but we

[22:03] really can't

[22:04] pay for everything

[22:05] at once, you know, in one

[22:06] payment. And by

[22:11] redistributing resources a little bit,

[22:12] we'll be able to assign

[22:13] more other projects to the CPC

[22:14] , which I

[22:16] think is a valuable

[22:17] tool for the

[22:18] city. This will also have a

[22:20] positive impact on

[22:21] our credit

[22:22] rating in the long term.

[22:23] Yes, I understand that this has

[22:24] already

[22:24] been used

[22:26] for other CPC projects.

[22:27] Corey, do you want

[22:28] to add anything?

[22:30] No.

[22:32] OK. Do the

[22:33] commissioners have any

[22:34] questions about this?

[22:38] Does the public have any questions

[22:39] ? I don't hear any

[22:46] questions. Let's move

[22:50] on, as we did

[22:51] before, to requesting

[22:52] letters of support that

[22:53] could be

[22:54] sent to the

[22:55] city council and also

[22:56] referenced

[22:57] during the city meeting.

[23:02] We have a letter from

[23:02] the Commission on

[23:04] Disability.

[23:05] We have a letter from the

[23:07] Recreation Commission. I know

[23:08] Gowrie is working on a

[23:09] letter from the

[23:10] Waterways Authority

[23:11] . I submitted a request

[23:12] to the

[23:13] Economic

[23:14] Development Commission. Patrice

[23:16] is busy

[23:17] receiving a number of

[23:20] other letters. People

[23:21] supported us

[23:23] during the previous

[23:24] CPC funding. I

[23:26] will submit a letter on behalf of the

[23:29] Arts Commission. Are there

[23:31] any other updates or

[23:33] questions about this

[23:34] ? OK. Corey,

[23:44] let's discuss

[23:45] additional

[23:46] outreach. We

[23:48] want to hold another

[23:50] open

[23:51] meeting before the

[23:52] town meeting on

[23:53] October 19th. Can we

[23:55] discuss this?

[23:58] Yes. There is

[24:03] a lot of information being circulated right now

[24:04] , and it seems like

[24:06] people are a bit confused

[24:07] about what will be

[24:08] allowed in the park. Is it

[24:13] possible to

[24:14] park there? Why isn't this an

[24:16] Italian restaurant

[24:17] ? Well, and much more.

[24:22] Why can't we

[24:23] have a pool there? Why

[24:24] can't you build a

[24:25] hockey rink?

[24:28] I think we need to

[24:29] clarify some things

[24:31] before the town

[24:31] meeting. Of course, we've

[24:37] discussed this

[24:38] at meetings before, but it's been a

[24:39] few

[24:40] years since the

[24:42] funding vote. I haven't

[24:49] picked a date yet, but we'll

[24:51] probably do it

[24:52] at the library, in the

[24:53] community room

[24:54] downstairs. We will

[25:10] also prepare

[25:12] FAQ documents and

[25:13] handouts

[25:14] for people that we

[25:15] can distribute

[25:16] during town

[25:17] meetings or post in advance

[25:19] in various

[25:20] locations; These will be

[25:21] explanatory

[25:22] information sheets

[25:23] that will help

[25:24] remind us of the history of the

[25:25] large-scale

[25:26] educational

[25:27] work we have already

[25:28] carried out over the past 16

[25:29] years. So, just to

[25:45] refresh

[25:46] people's memory, this is an issue

[25:47] that has been consistently

[25:48] supported in the

[25:49] past. Especially the

[25:53] parking issue. I

[25:58] think this is something that has

[25:59] come up quite often over the

[26:01] years during

[26:02] our

[26:02] design process. The one

[26:07] thing people don't

[26:12] quite understand is that there

[26:13] really

[26:14] can't be a

[26:15] parking

[26:16] lot there because

[26:17] it's restricted by the terms of the title deed

[26:19] . When the city

[26:23] purchased this

[26:24] property in 2010, the

[26:26] funding source was

[26:30] MBTA compensatory measures funds. And this

[26:35] was accompanied by a

[26:37] land use restriction

[26:39] that was attached to it

[26:40] . Therefore, this

[26:46] property should

[26:47] be used as

[26:48] open space,

[26:49] for viewing

[26:50] platforms,

[26:51] recreation, or education;

[26:52] Parking can

[26:54] only be an auxiliary

[26:54] element to these

[26:55] main

[26:56] activities, but

[26:57] cannot be the main

[26:58] purpose of the site

[27:00] .

[27:06] True.

[27:07] And we discussed this

[27:08] at the city council as well

[27:09] . So, he

[27:13] Who else agrees with

[27:14] this interpretation?

[27:15] That's right. Yes.

[27:20] I think I

[27:21] will give a short

[27:22] presentation at the

[27:23] town meeting at

[27:24] the request of the CPC, and also, I

[27:26] think, at our

[27:27] open meeting.

[27:32] As Corey said, we

[27:33] want to go back

[27:34] in history and provide

[27:36] context for those who

[27:37] may not have been following

[27:39] this since 2010. And

[27:42] to touch on these

[27:43] issues. We have also

[27:49] made significant

[27:49] efforts to

[27:50] provide

[27:51] parking near the

[27:52] park on Jericho Road

[27:53] , and have also identified

[27:54] the possibility of creating

[27:55] additional spaces on the

[27:56] grassy area

[27:58] near the pier.

[28:02] So, it will be a

[28:03] block from there.

[28:04] It seems there are about

[28:05] 32 seats. I think that's

[28:07] pretty good. So,

[28:11] of course, we

[28:12] will inform everyone about the

[28:13] date we choose for

[28:15] this public

[28:16] meeting. And one more thing:

[28:22] through your contact

[28:23] committees, just

[28:24] friends and neighbors,

[28:25] spread information

[28:27] about the project and

[28:28] encourage people

[28:29] to come to the

[28:30] town meeting and support

[28:31] it. Um, we're also

[28:35] open to, if there are any

[28:37] groups that you

[28:38] think would like to have a

[28:39] presentation

[28:40] , we'd be happy to

[28:41] do that, as we have in the

[28:42] past. So, are there

[28:45] any more questions about

[28:46] this? Okay, we're

[28:50] moving on to the

[28:51] commissioners' reports. Uh, Athena, do

[28:55] you have anything to report? You did a

[28:57] great job with

[28:58] the letter of support from the

[28:59] commission. Really

[29:01] good. I sent it to

[29:03] everyone.

[29:04] I didn't write this

[29:05] letter. I just started

[29:07] the draft, and Megan

[29:08] Summer continued,

[29:09] she's the chair, so all the

[29:11] credit goes to her.

[29:12] Got it.

[29:15] Um, no, uh, I was talking

[29:17] to Corey about, uh,

[29:18] I don't know if I'd call

[29:19] it education, but

[29:21] education is really

[29:22] important for the people of

[29:23] the city, because people don't

[29:25] remember what happened 16

[29:26] years ago. And many

[29:33] people in

[29:34] leadership positions

[29:35] constantly raise the

[29:37] issue of parking.

[29:43] So I just think

[29:45] educating people, like we

[29:46] talked about with, oh my

[29:47] god, the MVP 2.0 program with

[29:49] Danielle Dolan and Corey

[29:50] , educating them so that

[29:51] people know what's

[29:52] going on, not on

[29:54] the night of the town meeting, but

[29:55] in advance while it's

[29:57] going on.

[30:01] Of course, and to motivate

[30:03] them to come to the meeting and

[30:04] support this

[30:05] project. Thank you, Athena.

[30:09] Thank you.

[30:10] Tracy, do you have

[30:11] anything to report?

[30:12] No, uh, you got

[30:13] our letter, right?

[30:14] Yes, a wonderful letter.

[30:16] Good.

[30:16] Yes. Thank you for that.

[30:18] Howie?

[30:19] Just waiting for the

[30:20] next

[30:21] waterways meeting,

[30:22] which will be held on

[30:23] the first Wednesday in October.

[30:25] There were a few questions,

[30:26] but the commission

[30:27] is very, positive. They

[30:30] only had technical

[30:31] questions about

[30:32] funding and

[30:34] how it would affect the

[30:34] funding of the

[30:35] projects

[30:36] we are currently working on.

[30:41] So I suspect

[30:42] they will all agree

[30:43] to send a letter of

[30:44] support, and that is now

[30:45] in the hands of Dave Janin

[30:47] , the chairman.

[30:51] Yes, I am very grateful to

[30:52] our

[30:54] City Administrator Nancy Hall for her

[30:55] help in

[30:56] organizing the meeting

[30:57] so that we could

[30:58] discuss these

[30:58] issues, and I think

[31:00] it was very

[31:01] productive. Nico, do

[31:04] you have something to

[31:05] report?

[31:07] Sorry. What do I want? Is

[31:08] there any report

[31:10] you would like to provide?

[31:11] Not quite. I

[31:12] mean, I think

[31:14] we're fine, except for what

[31:15] we just

[31:16] talked about. I believe that

[31:17] the importance of

[31:18] educational

[31:19] work cannot be

[31:20] overstated. I have

[31:24] real optimism that

[31:25] we

[31:26] will see this through to the

[31:27] end, and I can

[31:29] support it 100% at

[31:30] every stage. I'm

[31:35] worried about

[31:36] public opinion because

[31:37] people no longer

[31:38] remember what

[31:39] happened 16 years ago. I

[31:44] remember it quite

[31:45] clearly, although sometimes the

[31:46] details get blurred, and

[31:48] I think it's important to

[31:49] briefly recount this

[31:50] story to show

[31:51] how complicated

[31:52] the process was and

[31:53] how nearly

[31:54] impossible any

[31:56] other option was.

[32:05] In addition, I believe

[32:07] that we should

[32:07] focus on

[32:09] how reliable the

[32:10] budget is, how this project

[32:11] through the CPC does not affect

[32:13] this year's budget or

[32:14] next year's, and does not

[32:15] affect any

[32:16] financial discussions

[32:17] in the city. I would try

[32:28] not to use the word "

[32:29] overrun" during

[32:31] this conversation, but

[32:32] if this issue

[32:33] arises, we should

[32:34] make it clear that this will

[32:35] not affect the decision

[32:36] on the

[32:37] budget overrun in April. This is a

[32:44] completely separate

[32:45] project that

[32:46] has been in the works for many

[32:47] years; it has

[32:48] support and will be

[32:49] placed within a

[32:50] financial framework that

[32:51] takes it beyond the

[32:52] topic of overshoot. I would

[32:57] n't be the first to mention this

[32:58] , but I'm sure the

[32:59] issue will come up,

[33:00] and we should be

[33:01] prepared to clearly

[33:02] defend our

[33:03] position so that people

[33:04] understand the point, because

[33:05] this could become a

[33:06] major topic for

[33:07] discussion. Will

[33:11] we have to

[33:12] buy very expensive

[33:13] weed and pay for it

[33:15] with our taxes? I

[33:21] think it's important

[33:22] to understand: to have a

[33:23] great city to

[33:25] live in, we've been paying taxes for 50 years

[33:27] , and there are

[33:28] good reasons for that. We

[33:37] need to

[33:37] polish

[33:38] the wording because we

[33:39] know the city has to

[33:41] vote at the

[33:42] meeting, and we

[33:42] need people to

[33:44] vote "yes"

[33:45] understanding that this is not

[33:46] just expensive grass,

[33:47] but a quality waterfront and

[33:49] ecology. These are exactly the

[33:54] things we should

[33:55] finalize before the

[33:56] October meeting,

[33:57] and I believe we have

[33:58] all the arguments to

[34:00] defend and

[34:00] promote our

[34:01] idea. I am so grateful to

[34:02] Corey, Paul, and everyone

[34:03] who worked so hard

[34:04] for a

[34:05] long time,

[34:06] much longer than I have,

[34:07] to see this thing through

[34:08] to the finish line. So I'm very

[34:10] confident. Um, but

[34:11] we're all, you know, none of

[34:13] us are blind. We are all

[34:15] living in difficult

[34:16] economic times, our

[34:17] city is going

[34:18] through them, and fortunately

[34:19] we have a very good

[34:21] team to

[34:21] help us

[34:22] stay ahead of these kinds of

[34:24] things. This is a project that

[34:25] we absolutely

[34:26] need to

[34:26] implement. I will be

[34:27] more than happy to

[34:28] come forward and say

[34:29] this in person when the

[34:30] time comes. Um, that's actually how

[34:32] I

[34:33] feel about it.

[34:35] I appreciate it.

[34:36] I had one

[34:37] question, Nico, because what

[34:38] you said just

[34:39] reminded me of

[34:40] something. A lot of people

[34:41] are asking, and this will

[34:42] come up either at the

[34:43] informational meeting

[34:44] or at the town meeting:

[34:46] will the Department of

[34:47] Public Works (DPW)

[34:48] service this, and

[34:49] if not, what is the plan,

[34:51] because they don't want it to

[34:52] become a dog park again

[34:53] . So, this is

[34:56] going to be a huge

[34:58] maintenance issue.

[35:00] Yes. Uh, so first of all,

[35:03] let me

[35:04] say that I will have a

[35:05] much clearer and more

[35:06] definitive answer

[35:07] when it comes time for the

[35:08] public hearings and the

[35:10] October meeting,

[35:11] because I want to

[35:12] make sure that

[35:13] I speak more clearly than I

[35:14] can tonight

[35:15] .

[35:15] No, no, and I don't expect

[35:16] any answer. I

[35:18] just know this

[35:19] question will come up.

[35:20] 100%. I think this

[35:22] will be just as

[35:22] relevant as the

[35:24] budget overrun issue,

[35:25] which is likely

[35:26] to be raised. I

[35:29] think the

[35:30] dog park question

[35:32] could very well come up like this

[35:33] , and I hope I have the

[35:35] arguments to give a

[35:36] very clear, concise,

[35:38] and direct answer to

[35:39] it. I don't want to

[35:45] make a mistake

[35:46] tonight, unless

[35:47] Corey wants to

[35:48] support me in

[35:49] what we've already

[35:50] put into this process,

[35:52] but DPW will play

[35:53] a role in the

[35:54] regular things like

[35:55] trash collection and so on.

[35:58] As for maintenance,

[35:59] i.e. grass cutting,

[36:01] etc., DPW, I believe,

[36:02] plans to do

[36:03] all the normal

[36:04] weekly summer

[36:05] maintenance. But when

[36:08] you talk about—and this is

[36:09] important to me,

[36:10] so I'm glad you

[36:11] asked—when you

[36:12] talk about

[36:13] long-term

[36:14] care. So,

[36:18] you know, will anyone be

[36:19] pressure washing the

[36:20] memorial benches

[36:21] in 10 years? Will

[36:26] someone, you know, make sure that

[36:29] all the broken

[36:30] synthetic parts on the embankment are replaced? Well

[36:34] , things of that sort.

[36:39] This is a very valid

[36:40] question, and it is extremely important to me

[36:42] to perform better in the

[36:43] next 20 years

[36:44] than in the

[36:45] previous 20. I am

[36:46] not blaming anyone, I

[36:48] am just trying to better

[36:49] consider

[36:50] long-term

[36:51] maintenance in

[36:52] our designs. So

[36:57] Corey, I'm going to ask

[36:58] you to check me out here.

[37:03] Currently, the current

[37:04] project budget does not

[37:05] take into account

[37:06] long-term

[37:07] maintenance of

[37:08] the facility. I guess

[37:16] partly because we have

[37:18] n't defined it yet, and

[37:19] partly because,

[37:20] frankly, we

[37:21] still do a poor

[37:22] job—and I'm

[37:23] saying this for myself and

[37:25] everyone here—of

[37:26] understanding that

[37:27] when you vote at a

[37:28] city meeting on a

[37:29] budget item and

[37:31] spend

[37:31] $3.8 million,

[37:33] everyone who votes

[37:34] wants to spend

[37:35] as little money as possible and

[37:36] doesn't want to talk about

[37:37] service because

[37:38] we don't need to

[37:39] spend that money

[37:41] today. The problem is that it would be

[37:48] nice to move into an

[37:49] almost cultural or

[37:50] philosophical

[37:51] discussion about finances.

[37:53] God forbid that

[37:54] be an oxymoron.

[37:57] To plant the idea that

[37:58] you need to add $

[38:00] 10,000 or $2,000

[38:01] a year for 20

[38:02] years to maintain a

[38:04] waterfront that won't

[38:05] last 200 years.

[38:09] So can I

[38:10] say this more

[38:11] eloquently in October?

[38:13] I hope so. Uh, and

[38:14] Corey, do you have any

[38:16] thoughts on this

[38:17] ? Am I, am I wrong about

[38:18] this?

[38:19] No, you are absolutely

[38:20] right. Well, you know,

[38:21] as far as the

[38:22] public works department is concerned,

[38:23] they can mow

[38:24] the grass. They are good at

[38:26] mowing grass.

[38:27] They are not very good

[38:28] at gardening. So, with

[38:31] this in mind, we

[38:32] made sure that the

[38:33] planting design

[38:34] included

[38:35] extremely

[38:35] low-

[38:36] maintenance

[38:37] plants. There,

[38:41] for example, grow

[38:42] herbs that simply

[38:44] exist, uh, that are

[38:45] local to this

[38:46] region. So they

[38:48] don't really

[38:48] need

[38:49] much care.

[38:51] We don't plant

[38:52] rose bushes that need to be

[38:53] pruned and, you know

[38:55] , all that other stuff. But,

[39:00] uh, the harbormaster, uh

[39:02] , will take the moorings off, uh

[39:03] , or take the pontoon,

[39:05] uh, for the winter. Uh, I don't

[39:10] know where exactly we'll

[39:11] store it, but

[39:12] it's not that big.

[39:14] We will find a place. Uh

[39:16] , the Department of

[39:19] Public Works

[39:20] will take out the trash. Uh

[39:22] , in terms of

[39:26] long-term

[39:27] care, we,

[39:28] you know, maybe

[39:29] talked about

[39:31] creating a

[39:32] support group before. Um, that's something that

[39:40] Paul could

[39:41] maybe talk about,

[39:42] but it's one

[39:43] way that we

[39:44] can raise

[39:45] funds for...

[39:51] And it's also complicated

[39:52] because there are

[39:53] legal implications

[39:54] to those kinds of

[39:55] funding structures if you

[39:57] try to set

[39:58] them up today. You know, it's

[40:01] one thing to say that

[40:03] we're going to put

[40:04] $10,000 in the budget right now,

[40:05] which is for,

[40:07] you know, the first

[40:08] annual

[40:08] maintenance,

[40:10] right? But saying that

[40:14] we will put money in

[40:16] the budget now for a 20-

[40:17] year inspection and

[40:18] major repairs

[40:19] doesn't really

[40:20] work, because we won't

[40:21] be able to remove this

[40:22] item from the city

[40:23] budget until this

[40:24] money is

[40:25] spent. So there are

[40:29] some difficulties, and you

[40:30] say that there are other

[40:31] ways to raise

[40:32] funds, but there is nowhere to direct them right now

[40:34] . If

[40:37] you have a

[40:38] recreation department or a

[40:39] sewer service

[40:40] , you have a

[40:41] corporate fund,

[40:42] but that park will not

[40:43] have its own

[40:44] corporate fund

[40:45] . So there are things

[40:48] we can start

[40:49] thinking about, and that's an important

[40:50] thing. In fact,

[40:53] we don't even have a

[40:54] proper mechanism

[40:56] to replenish the budget for

[40:57] this project if

[40:58] we wanted to. I just

[41:00] saw a question on the screen

[41:01] about

[41:02] landscaping.

[41:03] Certainly, I think that

[41:04] landscaping

[41:05] will play a

[41:06] role. I was just at a

[41:08] landscaping meeting last

[41:09] night. This is a great

[41:10] group. They do

[41:11] incredible things and

[41:12] want to take on

[41:13] more. In particular, they are

[41:16] very interested in

[41:17] caring for our

[41:18] wetlands

[41:20] and surrounding

[41:20] areas more

[41:22] than before, or

[41:22] at least more

[41:23] openly and

[41:24] directly. So I

[41:26] don't want to speak on

[41:27] behalf of the

[41:28] landscaping committee about

[41:29] what they are ready or not

[41:30] ready to take on.

[41:36] But I will say this:

[41:37] Depending on what

[41:38] these maintenance tasks look like

[41:39] ,

[41:40] beautification is just

[41:42] one of many

[41:43] areas in the city where

[41:44] we could create a

[41:45] committee to

[41:46] form a separate

[41:47] group of volunteers who are

[41:48] interested in this

[41:49] area, have a

[41:50] passion for this

[41:51] park or waterfront,

[41:53] to work as

[41:54] part of a maintenance

[41:55] team. But I don't

[42:01] think I want to get

[42:02] too deep into that

[42:04] at this point in our

[42:05] conversation. Mostly, I

[42:06] 'll be honest, I

[42:07] just want to get

[42:08] this over with, like

[42:09] most of us, and

[42:10] then sort out

[42:12] some things, although it's

[42:13] really important to me that

[42:14] we

[42:15] manage

[42:16] our public

[42:17] assets better. I think

[42:18] we use

[42:19] some

[42:19] I have, I have two

[42:21] questions. First, I don't

[42:22] know if the

[42:24] landscaping commission is funded by the city?

[42:26] Are we

[42:27] funding this too? The

[42:28] Improvement Commission is a

[42:29] separate budget line

[42:31] funded by the city

[42:32] under the direction of the

[42:33] council, yes.

[42:33] Okay, thank you. And the other

[42:35] question was:

[42:36] I like

[42:37] the idea of the Friends of

[42:38] Scituate Harbor Park because

[42:39] I look at what the

[42:41] Friends of the

[42:41] Library do. And we used to

[42:44] have, I guess, a

[42:45] Friends of the

[42:47] Disability Commission, which

[42:48] no longer exists, but

[42:50] I like

[42:51] the idea that people could

[42:52] donate to it,

[42:53] you know, like a

[42:58] donation, and then with that

[43:00] money they could

[43:01] maintain parts of the

[43:02] park when they

[43:03] start to fall into disrepair

[43:04] .

[43:08] They can be very

[43:09] good

[43:11] complementary organizations to

[43:12] help...And again

[43:13] , that's why I don't

[43:14] want to get bogged down in the minutiae of a

[43:16] meeting like this

[43:17] . I would probably

[43:21] refrain from

[43:22] discussing this

[43:23] now until it's

[43:24] approved because, well,

[43:26] two things. First,

[43:28] to have a

[43:29] support group, you need

[43:30] someone to

[43:31] take care of it. This is not a

[43:32] city organization.

[43:34] This is a 501c3 non-governmental

[43:35] organization in

[43:37] most cases.

[43:39] Therefore, the city bears no

[43:40] responsibility or

[43:42] obligations. That's

[43:44] part of the second

[43:45] challenge, because sometimes these are

[43:46] phenomenal and

[43:47] impactful organizations, and

[43:49] I'm a part of many

[43:50] of them. I don't want to

[43:52] use

[43:53] tonight

[43:55] as an example to

[43:55] criticize the dog

[43:57] park. I should have come

[43:58] up with a better

[43:59] pun. But, of course,

[44:01] he's had

[44:02] problems recently, and this is also a

[44:03] support group. So

[44:05] , you know, they can

[44:07] be useful, but

[44:08] they have to be

[44:09] organized,

[44:10] coordinated

[44:10] mechanisms, and the city is

[44:12] not responsible for them

[44:12] .

[44:14] So I would probably

[44:15] recommend, unless

[44:16] Paul and Corey

[44:17] feel otherwise, not to

[44:18] talk about

[44:20] support groups until it's

[44:21] approved, and

[44:22] then we try to

[44:23] figure out what's possible.

[44:26] I agree. I mean

[44:28] , I've been in a lot of

[44:29] volunteer

[44:30] organizations, I

[44:31] ran courses for 15

[44:32] years, and they

[44:32] start strong, and

[44:34] then like the

[44:35] Disability Commission,

[44:36] actually, Athena, I used to

[44:37] work with

[44:38] people who were in

[44:39] Friends of the Disability Commission

[44:42] . Um, the course is another

[44:43] example. It's not as

[44:46] effective as it was six

[44:48] years ago, or

[44:49] just...and the

[44:50] dog park, a lot of

[44:51] things like that start off

[44:52] successful, even the "

[44:54] Scithawaite Recreation Friends" faded away, and

[44:55] we're trying to

[44:56] revive that. So that's a

[44:59] great thing, and I think

[45:00] we'll

[45:01] get a lot of

[45:02] enthusiasm initially, but it's

[45:03] just not a

[45:04] long-term

[45:05] strategy. This is my

[45:06] only advice if this

[45:08] question arises, because it

[45:09] all depends on

[45:10] who is volunteering

[45:12] during a specific

[45:12] time period.

[45:14] But a good question is the

[45:15] exaggerated

[45:16] promises about...

[45:17] Yes.

[45:18] True. That's right. A

[45:19] good question, I

[45:20] think, started with

[45:21] how do we

[45:22] support it,

[45:23] right? And the question is,

[45:24] can we

[45:25] come up with

[45:26] tools that are

[45:27] long-term

[45:28] structures that

[45:29] work? Friends—that's

[45:30] great, um, until you

[45:31] ask them to

[45:32] help you move

[45:33] into a new apartment, and

[45:34] then they suddenly

[45:35] become busy. So

[45:37] , um, that's exactly the

[45:38] danger you

[45:39] want to try to

[45:40] avoid. And in general,

[45:42] for this discussion about

[45:43] getting

[45:44] things done, I would

[45:45] advise staying

[45:46] away from this topic.

[45:48] And unfortunately, on

[45:49] long-term

[45:50] maintenance, if

[45:51] it comes up, I think

[45:52] we can give a

[45:53] rational and straightforward

[45:54] answer, but I'm not

[45:56] sure we have a

[45:57] great answer to

[45:58] say, "Oh yeah, we have it

[45:59] under control for

[46:01] 70 years." We have

[46:02] n't yet, but we have

[46:02] short-term

[46:03] service

[46:05] available.

[46:09] I think the thing is, the

[46:10] elected board is

[46:11] ultimately responsible

[46:12] for maintaining all

[46:13] city property and

[46:15] facilities, so...I

[46:20] think, you know, we'll

[46:21] help, but I

[46:22] think they'll

[46:23] probably come up with a

[46:24] plan for that.

[46:26] I support this

[46:27] statement.

[46:30] I want to see if

[46:31] anyone from the

[46:31] public wants

[46:33] to speak. I think

[46:35] you can ask for the

[46:36] sound to be turned on, and we

[46:38] can do that

[46:39] if anyone has anything to

[46:40] add at this

[46:41] point. I don't

[46:47] see anyone. I hope,

[46:49] thank you all for

[46:50] participating. I think we

[46:51] are moving on to

[46:52] closing the meeting.

[46:54] Any...Well, we received

[46:55] one request. Seth.

[46:57] No, it's just applause.

[46:59] This is not a raised hand.

[47:00] OK. Perfectly.

[47:01] OK. Thanks, um...

[47:03] But now you

[47:04] really have your hand raised.

[47:05] Wait a minute. Mr.

[47:06] Greenbaum, you can

[47:07] turn on your

[47:07] microphone. Just

[47:08] provide your name,

[47:09] address, and voice

[47:10] your question.

[47:12] Scott Greenbaum,

[47:14] 40 Damon Road, 02066. I

[47:19] looked over the plans and there is

[47:21] something that is

[47:21] unclear to me. Do the

[47:24] new

[47:25] plans include a floating

[47:26] dock or not? Because I heard

[47:31] that it was supposed to be there, but the

[47:33] plans online don't

[47:34] look like there will be a

[47:35] floating dock for

[47:36] those using the

[47:37] harbor.

[47:41] Yes, that's in the plans.

[47:45] We have all the permits, the

[47:46] environmental

[47:47] review, all

[47:48] the approvals at the

[47:49] local, state

[47:50] and federal

[47:51] levels, and they

[47:52] include the entrance and the

[47:53] floating dock. This

[47:56] is also part of the

[47:57] funding plan,

[47:58] as Corey mentioned. So yes

[48:00] , we are very

[48:01] happy about that. I think it would be

[48:05] great to

[48:07] kayak to the pier,

[48:08] go to a restaurant,

[48:09] get some fish and

[48:10] chips,

[48:10] enjoy them in the

[48:12] park, and then paddle on.

[48:18] My second question:

[48:20] will the embankment

[48:21] cover the

[48:22] shore fortifications? So what

[48:25] measures are foreseen

[48:26] to maintain

[48:27] this fortification? And

[48:31] is the budget for

[48:32] the project set aside for

[48:41] repairing the fortifications

[48:43] when you remove

[48:44] the foundation of Pier 44,

[48:45] because it actually

[48:46] holds up this entire

[48:47] structure? The stones

[48:55] there seem to be embedded in the

[48:56] concrete foundation on the

[48:58] water side of Pier 44.

[49:02] Thanks, Scott. Uh, Corey

[49:04] ...

[49:04] I think, yes, I think that

[49:06] ......

[49:06] this is an important part of

[49:07] the project, and Corey can

[49:09] talk about it in

[49:10] more detail.

[49:11] Yes, it's great that you

[49:13] asked about it. I think this is something

[49:15] we haven't

[49:17] talked about too much

[49:18] before. We

[49:20] invited

[49:21] engineers, specialists in

[49:23] coastal structures, to

[49:24] inspect this

[49:25] fortification. They

[49:36] provided recommendations

[49:37] for strengthening, and this has

[49:38] been taken into account in the design

[49:39] and budget: we will

[49:40] completely rebuild the

[49:41] fortifications as part of

[49:43] this project. Some of the

[49:59] stones are too small, they are

[50:00] sagging, there is a lot of

[50:01] concrete debris, which

[50:02] we will remove during the

[50:04] work, replacing it

[50:05] with larger protective

[50:06] stones. So within the framework of

[50:16] this project, everything

[50:17] will be completely

[50:17] redesigned.

[50:22] Well, that's good to hear,

[50:23] because it's unstable and has

[50:25] probably been there since

[50:28] Pier 44 was built.

[50:30] Yes.

[50:31] No one

[50:32] paid attention to him.

[50:35] As you noticed,

[50:36] Scott, it's like a

[50:37] garbage dump, not a

[50:38] proper

[50:39] shoreline fortification. As

[50:44] Corey said, it would be nice if it was

[50:46] Yes.

[50:47] to rebuild. Scott,

[50:49] you don't necessarily

[50:50] have to answer,

[50:51] but do you support the

[50:53] floating dock?

[50:59] Yeah, I just wasn't

[51:00] sure he

[51:01] survived the

[51:02] budget cuts because he...

[51:07] Well, I encourage you and

[51:09] all your friends

[51:10] who support this to

[51:11] come to town

[51:12] meetings and have your

[51:13] say too. That would be

[51:14] great.

[51:15] Thank you. Are

[51:16] there any more questions from the

[51:17] public?

[51:20] To continue on this

[51:21] topic, Paul, I think, and

[51:22] in support of

[51:23] Scott's point, I very much support that as well

[51:24] . We've

[51:25] talked about this in the

[51:26] last few

[51:27] meetings. We

[51:28] understood the financial

[51:30] implications, tried

[51:31] to be respectful and

[51:32] fiscally

[51:33] responsible by

[51:34] cutting back a little bit on

[51:35] expenses, and that's where,

[51:36] you know, a large

[51:37] facility like a canopy

[51:38] really got

[51:39] cut. But the

[51:44] floating dock, in my

[51:46] opinion, is an important

[51:47] part of the integration of

[51:48] this park and, you know, the

[51:49] synergy with all the

[51:50] different

[51:51] uses that we

[51:53] can get from

[51:54] this land and

[51:55] space, both on land

[51:56] and on water. So I

[52:04] think it's important not

[52:05] only to make sure

[52:06] our kayakers, fishermen

[52:07] and the public,

[52:09] you know,

[52:10] water users, understand that this is an

[52:11] integral part of the

[52:12] project, but also not

[52:13] just to

[52:14] get votes, but also

[52:16] to manage the

[52:17] area, its

[52:18] use and

[52:19] public access to it.

[52:24] This was a really

[52:25] crucial element that

[52:26] I thought was

[52:27] important to keep in the

[52:28] plan. So I'm really

[52:30] glad he's

[52:30] part of the final

[52:32] offer. I

[52:35] completely agree, and as

[52:36] Corey mentioned, our

[52:37] job as the MBTA

[52:38] under the restrictions

[52:39] in the act is to

[52:40] use this

[52:41] property to

[52:42] connect

[52:43] the public to

[52:44] their waterfront in the

[52:45] harbor, and

[52:46] I can't see a better way to do that

[52:47] . So we will

[52:51] have people

[52:53] arriving by

[52:54] car, by bike, on

[52:55] foot, and also from the

[52:56] harbor side. This will be

[52:58] great. Are there any more

[53:01] comments or

[53:02] questions? Good. I

[53:06] ask for a motion to

[53:07] adjourn the meeting. Howie

[53:12] proposes, I support

[53:14] . OK. Are there any

[53:15] discussions? I ask the

[53:18] committee members to vote. Athena?

[53:22] Is that "yes"?

[53:24] Athena?

[53:26] Yes.

[53:26] Paul—yes. Howie?

[53:29] Yes.

[53:29] Betsy?

[53:30] Yes.

[53:31] Perfectly. Okay,

[53:32] the meeting is closed at

[53:34] 7:25. OK.

[53:36] See you all at the

[53:38] community meeting on

[53:39] October 19th. We will schedule a

[53:43] future meeting of

[53:44] this committee after the

[53:45] community meeting to

[53:46] discuss the successful

[53:47] vote and

[53:48] next steps.

[53:51] And bring everyone you

[53:52] can. We will

[53:53] need the votes

[53:54] in this chamber to

[53:55] pass this. So

[53:56] please spread the

[53:57] word.

[53:58] Tell your

[53:59] neighbors, friends and

[54:00] Important.

[54:00] Or

Scituate Harbor Advisory Redevelopment Committee Meeting - 09-17-2026

Transcript