[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