[Denis MacDougall]: Good evening, everyone. Can people hear me? Okay, good. All right. I'm not on my normal computer, so I'm a little out of sorts. Welcome to the Conservation Commission meeting for July 9th, 2025. First item on the agenda is a notice of intent for 99 river beach parkway TPC land acquisition company LOP has filed a notice of intent for a proposed redevelopment 97 and 99 river beach parkway redevelopment proposal includes the demolition of existing radio station an existing radio station building parking lots and associated structures and construction of a new 352,400 gross square foot transit-oriented multi-family residential building with ground floor retail and structured parking. Additional site improvements include a new stormwater management system, waterfront public access waterways, walkways, wildlife habitat enhancements, a portion of the properties within the 200-foot riverfront area, including the Malden River, and the 100-foot buffer zones, top of bank, and bordering vegetation.
[Heidi Davis]: Thank you, Denny. Denny, excuse me. I've never called you that before.
[Denis MacDougall]: Quite all right.
[Heidi Davis]: Before we start, a bit of housekeeping. I just wanted to mention that this project does not have a DEP file number associated with it yet. And apparently, there is an outstanding balance. So I suggest you contact the Northeast Regional Office to try and resolve that.
[SPEAKER_02]: Okay, shall I jump into the presentation? Please do. Dennis, I just requested screen sharing.
[Denis MacDougall]: Good to go.
[SPEAKER_02]: All right.
[Heidi Davis]: If you could introduce yourself, please, we'd appreciate it.
[SPEAKER_02]: Yes. Can everyone see my screen? Okay. My name's Natty King. I'm an environmental planner with Fort Point Associates. Here to present on the 97-99 Revere Beach Parkway Notice of Intent. The applicant for this project is CPC Land Acquisition Company, LLC. And with us today from that firm is Jack Englert and Eric Von Arum. Would either of you like to say an opening remark?
[Jack Englert]: I'm happy to do so. Thank you for having us tonight. And I realized we've been kind of starting and stopping here. And the explanation for that is just in this environment, equity has been a little difficult. We have recently signed a term sheet for the equity on this project, which doesn't sound like a big step, but it's a huge step for us because we've been trying to do so for the last several years. Anyway, we're anticipating getting through that process with that particular group and moving forward. And we appreciate all the patience that you've had with us on this project from day one. It has been a long slug. And just wanted to thank you all for that.
[SPEAKER_02]: Thank you, Jack. Also here today is my colleague, Jamie Fay from Fort Point Associates and Brian Cullinan, who's covering for our civil engineer, Nate Scheel. We also have J.P. Shadley and John Gloads from Shadley Associates. They're the landscape architect for the project. So today we'll cover existing conditions of the site. We'll summarize the project overview. We'll get into resource area impacts and compliance with performance standards, discuss stormwater and construction period. And then we'll have time for questions and discussion from the commission at the end. So existing conditions, as I mentioned, the sites 97 and 99 Revere Beach Parkway, you may know it as the former kiss 108 radio station. It's located immediately adjacent to the MBTA Wellington Orange Line station, which is just off page to the southwest on this aerial photograph. To the east of the site is the Malden River, and to the north of the site is Revere Beach Parkway and the Woods Memorial Bridge. Also north of the site is an existing DCR public access walkway that passes under the Woods Memorial Bridge and travels to points north. The site is developed with a radio station building, footprint of about 9,000 square feet. It's also occupied by two parking lots, a turf lawn area, and several utility and radio broadcast structures. um the The rig also within the site is the vegetated Malden River shoreline that you can see along the eastern boundary here and in this bottom right photograph. As you can see, it's not in great shape. It has quite a bit of accumulated litter and debris. Cleaning that up is an important intent of the project among with overall site improvements of this previously developed property. So project overview, the applicant is proposing a six story, 350,000 gross square foot multifamily residential building. As I mentioned, it's closely proximate to the Wellington Orange Line Station, a great site for multifamily residential development. We'll also include a subsurface parking garage and retail along the Western building perimeter. A key component of the project is to expand shoreline public access along the Malden River. So to that end, we're proposing a network of publicly accessible walkways. Those will connect to that existing DCR walkway to the north and a proposed future DCR walkway to the south. The intent being to help open up public access to this site for the first time and help complete a missing link in the regional greenway network. We have been coordinating with DCR leading up to this filing to coordinate our design with the other walkways planned by DCR for the area. Beyond that, we are including a landscaping program that includes native vegetation and wildlife and pollinator habitat. We're also proposing, as I mentioned, improvement to the Malden River shoreline, removing invasive species and litter in that area. And of course, a new stormwater management system, including infiltration provisions, which I'll talk about as I move through the presentation. So here's an illustrative site plan for the project. The building is this orange in the middle along the western edge of the site. The building will be surrounded by a courtyard level with a swimming pool. To the west of the building are vehicular circulation drives, including access to the subsurface parking lot. And then moving east, we have a stairway down to the building, which will bring residents and others from the building down to the new publicly accessible network of pedestrian walkways. Surrounding that will be a mix of lawn and native landscaping. And south of the building will be the wildlife and pollinator habitat area that I'll talk about in a little more detail later on. And then along the Malden River shoreline, kind of east of this lightly dashed line that you'll be able to see better later on is that area where we're proposing the shoreline improvements, primarily cleaning it up to improve its condition. So here's a section view through the building. I believe this was requested by the commission when we presented this project informally several months ago, but this shows grades transitioning down from the building about at elevation 15, lowering down to elevation 12 to a pedestrian walkway through some landscape areas, another pedestrian walkway at elevation nine, To the page right of that is a stormwater discharge point, a level spreader outlet that I'll talk about later. And then to the right of that is the Malden River shoreline. So in terms of resource area impacts within the project site, we have a number of inland wetland resource areas that includes bank bordering vegetated wetlands and bordering land subject to flooding. These resource areas will have no direct impact from construction related to the walkway or the building. So that leaves us with the 100-foot buffer zone and the 200-foot riverfront area where portions of the project work will occur. That includes about 25,000 square feet of impacts within the previously developed riverfront area and 45,000 square feet of temporary impacts. And then for the buffer zone, 9,000 square feet of permanent impacts and 27,000 square feet of temporary impacts. So that includes walkway construction, landscaping, and construction of the building along the Western edge of the riverfront area. In terms of compliance with the performance standards, so the publicly accessible walkways are exempt from the riverfront performance standards. as is work within Chapter 91 jurisdiction, which includes limited portions of the site, really just the walkway area. So no need to get into detail on that, but we have obtained a administrative approval from the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Waterways Program for the portion of work that's within Chapter 91 jurisdiction. So that leaves us with the building footprint, the stairway connecting from the building to the shoreline walkways, and then several gravity walls to assist with grade transitions as the new impervious surfaces subject to the performance standards that will occur within riverfront area. And then the remainder of the work is temporary impacts with vegetated surfaces, much of which is native landscaping being the finished site condition. So existing degraded riverfront areas, about 9,800 square feet, that's shown in blue in this graphic on the screen. That includes the radio station building footprint, some paved areas and utility structures and outbuildings immediately north and east of it, a small portion of the radio station parking lot, and then the radio station's two broadcast towers in the turf lawn area to the south of the building. So our proposed work that I mentioned, the building footprint stairway and gravity walls total approximately 13,000 square feet in riverfront area that exceeds existing degraded by about 3,000 square feet. So we're proposing a mitigation program to offset that exceedance. All told, we're proposing about 20,000 square feet of mitigation. That's about a 6 to 1 ratio of mitigation to exceedance of existing degraded, going well beyond the 2 to 1 required. This comprises two areas. So one is the wildlife and pollinator habitat area, where my cursor is now, south of the proposed building. That area will be improved with a mix of native trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants that's intended to support the riverfront area functions and values and provide enhanced habitat compared to the existing lawn condition in that area. And that specific component is about 11,000 square feet. The second portion of the mitigation program is the shoreline cleanup shown in red in this image on the right. So that's an area that's significantly impacted by invasive species, also significantly accumulated litter and debris from years of neglect and under maintenance. We're proposing to clean that up, remove the invasive species, remove the litter, and reseed the areas that we've removed the invasive species from with a native conservation seed mix, and that's about 9,700 square feet in total. So in terms of the stormwater management system, what's shown on my screen, green are subsurface pipes, the yellow squares are catch basins or area drains, the blue are subsurface infiltration systems, and the orange is the level spreader outlet. So this comprises two separate catchment areas, one covering the northern half of the site and one covering the southern half. Both of them, both of these catchment areas have water quality devices to treat stormwater that runs off of paved areas for vehicular circulation. It's conveyed to the subsurface infiltration system and then stormwater in excess of the capacity of those systems for the northern Catchment area will be conveyed off site and tied into the existing drainage system under the Wellington Station access road. And for the southern system will be discharged to a new level spreader, that orange oval in the southern portion of the site. The intent of that design component is to allow the stormwater to discharge without having to build a new outfall in the Malden River. It allows us to set it back from the shoreline, and it includes riprap that will slow down and dissipate the velocity of stormwater discharge and allow it to gently flow over land into the Malden River. This system's compliant with the Massachusetts Stormwater Management Standards and will improve over the site's existing condition, which includes significant paved areas without any drainage features. In terms of the construction period, proposing perimeter controls, including compost filter tubes, construction fence with a windscreen both surrounding the site to prevent sediments and fugitive dust from impacting resource areas, catch basin inlet protection to prevent sediments from being conveyed into the drainage system, crushed rocks, stabilized construction exit, stabilization of slopes, and stabilized soil stockpiles, among other measures outlined in the NOI. And with that, just to sum it all up, this project will expand public access to the Malden River. It will expand wildlife and pollinator habitat, and it will greatly improve stormwater management at this previously developed site. And with that, I welcome any questions from the commission.
[Heidi Davis]: Thank you, Mr. King. I open it up to the commission for questions or comments.
[Jeremy Martin]: Who wants to start? There is some weird echo. I don't know if others can hear it.
[Heidi Davis]: Yes, I think we're all echoing. So it must be at the call.
[SPEAKER_08]: I guess I'll start, unless nobody else wants to go. I have just a simple question about the level spreader design, Natty. There was a section provided in your permit plans. It was just unclear to me how it's stabilized. I've seen level spreaders where there's a spreader bar at the sort of downward edge of the outlet. And it appears that you're just using soil to create that berm, for lack of a better term. I just want to make sure that that design is stabilized so that the downward edge of the basin isn't susceptible to slumping or washing.
[SPEAKER_02]: Well, I, I believe the design intent is to have the rip rap at the discharge point services that velocity dissipation area and our engineer Nate did let me know that stormwater. Passing over that area will be slowed down to a velocity of under. two feet per second, which is a non-erosive velocity. So by the time it passes outside of the riprap area, it'll be slowed down and is not expected to cause erosive impacts down gradient from the outlet point.
[SPEAKER_08]: Perfect. I appreciate that. Um, and I apologize if I'm jumping around. I don't know if any of my fellow commissioners have questions about stormwater if we want to stay on that topic, but, um, I do have questions about the invasive species monitoring. Um, so I'll stop there. If anybody, uh, I'm sure Craig's on, he's much more detail oriented on the stormwater than I am. So maybe we can swing over to him if he has questions. order.
[Craig Drennan]: You have me pegged, it seems. Yeah, I've got a handful of questions about the stormwater drainage design and specifically the infiltration arrays. I think the slide that you have up right now, as well as the overall landscaping plan that I believe was page 72 to your NOI I am a huge fan of what you guys are doing with your mitigation plan. My concern is, you know, flipping between what we're seeing on the screen now and what we have on the slide you just had up, is at the very least, that southern infiltration array looks to have maybe a foot of cover above it. like with, you know, six inches of cover to a foot and a half of cover. And that is being slated to have native trees and shrubs and somewhat dense vegetation to be put on top of it. I'm a little concerned about root impact messing with the efficacy and function of those infiltration arrays. So I'd be interested to hear whether the applicant team thinks that's an issue. And I would also like to see the stormwater subgrade somewhat be wrapped into what that landscaping plan looks like, because I think planting any tree of appreciable size with a foot of cover is going to result in impacts in five years.
[SPEAKER_02]: Certainly. Well, we appreciate that. You know, I think to some extent what you're seeing in this section view kind of, it's not exactly everything that's directly on the cut, right? Some of it's a little set back from it. I know we did build up the cover over the infiltration system to at least accommodate some lower type plantings, like shrubs at the very least. without larger trees intended to be sited in that area that may grow down and impact the infiltration system. But we do have our landscape architect, JP Shadley here. JP, would you like to say a word about that while we're on the topic? Or John Gloads?
[SPEAKER_03]: Natty's right that the section, if we were to blow up and go right in there, some of the areas have three or four feet actually of cover over and we concentrated the planting with smaller trees. So we've got, there's two colors in the code on the planting plan and The pink ones are amelanchiers, which we, by graphic license, we added a little bit more pink. They're really pretty white, but we just thought it was a prettier plant. So, but, you know, very, very small tree. And the other would be a cherry, like a pin cherry or a choke cherry, a native cherry. So there are smaller trees on purpose. But that being said, where the section line is drawn, if you zoom in on the plan, you can see that there's additional topography. So we've consolidated the area and worked with the civil really closely to make sure that we had enough cover there. And again, there's some places there's as much as four feet over the top. So as we do our CDs, we'll definitely be very careful to make sure that we have enough soil above the structures below.
[Craig Drennan]: Okay, I appreciate that. And you know, just throwing in the reminder that, you know, it's not just for, you know, if you need, if you have a four-foot root bottle planting, it's for when these things are grown in. I'm just concerned about the longevity of that system. But no, I appreciate that that planting plan is not finalized yet.
[SPEAKER_03]: Sure. I mean, additionally, you know, when We did a lot of work on this area, because it's a very sensitive thing. And the last thing we want to do is to put plants that require too much moisture over the top of these systems. So that while they're native, that doesn't mean that they're all the exact same plants across the board. So deeper into the swales will be an off of the the system, the drainage system below grade, there'll be a concentration of water. And so the plant material above grade will reflect that, where we know the soils will be more wet. So there's a way to go yet on the planting plan, but it's all habitat. They're all native that we're showing within that gold area.
[Craig Drennan]: Great. And that's a great segue to my second question, which is, One of the requirements, and this is an engineering question, one of the requirements for the stormwater management standards is an offset from seasonal high water table. I didn't see any mention in your NOI of subsurface investigations or test pits done to identify that or to verify the assumption made for infiltration rate. Are you able to speak to subsurface conditions on site?
[SPEAKER_02]: Uh, personally, I am not I'm sure our engineer Nate would be if he was here tonight. Um, I don't believe there's been, uh, any specific on site evaluations done, but I think it was. I believe some of the analysis was based on soil maps and other data used to inform that report. But I can pass that over to Nate for a more thorough response, certainly. And Brian, I don't know if you're at all familiar with anything in regards to Craig's question that you could speak to. If not, no worries.
[SPEAKER_06]: Yeah, I believe we were just relying on the USGS web soil data and some of the shoreline influence for the groundwater table. But I'm not aware of any on-site investigations that were taking place. So happy to chat with Nate about that further. Okay.
[Craig Drennan]: Yeah, I think I'd like to see, you know, even if there are calculations that have been done to back out depth to a water table, I think that would be worthwhile to demonstrate compliance with that portion of the stormwater management standards.
[SPEAKER_03]: Certainly.
[Heidi Davis]: And I concur with Greg's statement that there will need to be on-site data at some point. We can talk about conditioning that, but it's a very difficult thing to condition in the event that you don't have the soil to support infiltration. Right. Um, yeah. Sorry. No, you go ahead. No, no, I don't want to change, get off of, um, onsite.
[SPEAKER_02]: Follow up with our engineer about that. And we're, we're happy to, uh, um, do investigations if the commission determines that it's the appropriate thing to confirm the stormwater design. Great.
[Craig Drennan]: Thanks.
[Heidi Davis]: I'm sorry, Craig, your turn.
[Craig Drennan]: No worries. I have one more comment on stormwater, and then I will cede the floor. This is more of just a erosion sediment control plan comment, but in terms of showing construction phase E&S controls, we've The plans submitted only show inlet protection on proposed catch basins. They don't show any protection on existing catch basins. I think NOI page 67, which has this plan, there are catch basins on site that would end up being below the footprint of the proposed building that would be impacted by any on-site demolition work, et cetera. there should be notation in these plans indicating that existing capturations on site are subject to those E&S protections as well as any that are proposed.
[SPEAKER_02]: Yeah, that's understood. And certainly that's the intent. And we'll make sure that gets clarified and memorialized in the plans.
[Craig Drennan]: Great. Thank you very much. I will cede the floor to Heidi.
[Heidi Davis]: Thank you. Can you please remind us of what, I know that there was catchment areas shown in the stormwater report, but can you remind us, please, of what will be contributing to these subsurface infiltration areas?
[SPEAKER_02]: Sure. More or less, you could imagine an east-west line through the building, and that's the delineation between the two different catchment areas. That includes roof drains, so all of the building's roof will be routed to the infiltration system. We also have the paved circulation areas outside of resource areas, but nonetheless involved included in the catchment areas. Those paved areas for vehicular circulation will be routed through a water quality device before they reach the infiltration system. And then we also have area drains covering kind of along the Eastern edge of the building in the upper pathway to collect stormwater from that area.
[SPEAKER_02]: That's useful. Through the infiltrating system. Yeah.
[Heidi Davis]: Yes. We could, um, would appreciate more information on the subsurface on, I'm sorry, the pretreatment noting that the stormwater handle, um, uh, pretreatment is required unless the runoff is strictly from residential rooftops. So it would be helpful to have that kind of detail. Sure. And also there should be access ports for these subsurface systems. Are those, they're not shown on the plan, but I can see.
[SPEAKER_02]: I don't have the details on that, Brian. Is that something you might be able to answer?
[SPEAKER_06]: Um, yeah, these are shown on some of the details, um, it might not be shown on the, on the plans, uh, just at that scale. But, um, yeah, they, they are equipped with, um, we're looking at some of the call tech systems for the subsurface infiltration, um, system. So, uh, these, I forget the, uh, you know, square footage it's based on, but it should come with the equipped inspection ports per certain square foot for the area scaled up.
[Heidi Davis]: Great. Thanks. And just to reiterate what Craig said, we do need to know what the ESHGW is for this. I'm sorry, estimated seasonal high groundwater levels are. and site-specific soil information. I have just another minor regulatory comment, but if anybody else has stormwater comments, we might as well stick to that for now. Okay. I'll just barge ahead. It's a really picky thing, but your citation for The exemption under Chapter 91 references the Chapter 91 regs. However, it should actually reference the Riverfront Area Regulations at 10.58, parentheses six, parentheses I. Apologies for that.
[SPEAKER_02]: I intended to put in the one from the Wetlands Protection Act. I'm happy to amend and correct that citation.
[Heidi Davis]: It's totally picky, but because I have these tattoos on the inside of my arm, I cannot. Yes, of course. Oh, I'm sorry. One other question. So the plan should also indicate if and where snow storage will be on the site, particularly from the circulation areas. And of course, what we want to make sure is that it doesn't end up on top of the subsurface. or on top of the water quality devices, which would be more likely to happen.
[SPEAKER_02]: Understood. Thank you. Yes, we can work that into our drawings.
[Jeremy Martin]: Heidi, I'll jump in with some landscape questions unless you have anything else. I'm set for the moment. Thank you. Great. Thank you. I wanted to start with the existing conditions plan. I recall from our preview meeting several months ago, some discussion about existing trees and trying to have that surveyed. And I understand through reading the NOI that The shoreline is predominantly invasive species, but I am curious to know if there are any non-invasive species or any significant existing trees within that riverfront area, particularly in the area most adjacent to the shoreline, where there may be some opportunity to preserve those trees. with limited grading. Has that been investigated at all?
[SPEAKER_02]: It has been, yes. I went out with a colleague. We GPSed the trees within the limit of work. There's approximately 15 within the work area of which 10 are native that will be removed and offset through planting of over 40 new trees within the riverfront area as part of the project.
[Jeremy Martin]: Okay, can you provide some detail on those existing trees? I wasn't able to find that in the NOI, even a markup or a survey of where those exist and what the species are and if you have the size of them.
[SPEAKER_02]: Yes, I have all that information, not right on hand, but I have the data layer of it and I can produce a map that depicts them. But I know in terms of the invasive tree of heaven and black locust, and then I can't quite recall the native ones offhand, but there are varying maturities, varying levels of health. Some are in good shape, some are quite mangled and partially dead. But I do have all that information and I'm happy to package it up for you. Great. Thank you.
[Jeremy Martin]: Moving to the. to the site layout plan. I understand the pathway that connects to the existing multi-use trail is intended to be 10 feet wide. I assume that's a continuation of that multi-use trail. It is quite a bit of impervious paving in the rubber front area, and I'm not very familiar with the kind of like paving requirements for the pathways and DCR, but I'm curious if there are opportunities to introduce some permeable paving into that, into that paving surface, if you would consider that. And I did notice there's a large piece of paving. It's southeast corner of the building. Is that tab at the end of that pathway along the 10-foot path? Sorry, to the right there. Yeah, what is that intended for? It seemed to kind of project out towards the shoreline.
[SPEAKER_02]: Yes, that's intended to be a seating area, essentially. You know, a little space to step off the pathway and hang out along the shoreline and not obstruct people passing through.
[Jeremy Martin]: Is that different than the other little bench seating areas? shown to the north of that?
[SPEAKER_03]: Actually, Natty, if I jump in here, what we had proposed was that they were interpretive stations, that there'd be some history of the site and something that describes what we're doing with Habitat, that sort of thing. So we've accommodated four interpretive educational stations there. We took two and two each time.
[Jeremy Martin]: OK. Yeah, I just wonder if those might be better located a little bit off of the shoreline, off of the riverfront there. But it leads to another question, which Natty, you mentioned in the presentation you showed the zone of invasive plant removal and shoreline restoration. as one of the mitigations, but it's not clear to me from the plans what's happening between what's proposed between the 10 foot pathway and that red outlined area. There's some grading that happens in there, but there's no, not clear what the proposed planting is there. Can you elaborate on that?
[SPEAKER_02]: Yes, so that's true. It is the grading to match the pathway grade down to the existing grade in the area. We haven't fully fleshed out the specific plantings in this area. I think, you know, at a minimum, we intend on some sort of conservation seed mix, but there's also a likelihood that we incorporate some trees or other provisions there. The reason it's not fully fleshed out currently is ultimately that this area is what we're coordinating with DCR and ultimately intend to grant an easement for them to take over maintenance of the area going forward. The specific plantings in that zone are subject to those ongoing discussions, but it will be vegetated. I'll tell you that.
[Jeremy Martin]: Thanks. We'll definitely want to see some information on that plan and what's proposed there considering its proximity to the waterway. Then with that, JP, I'm wondering if you can just tell us a little bit about how the area for the wildlife and pollinator habitat was selected. When I look at the plans, I'll say, I appreciate the native tree planting. It concerns me a little bit about the amount of lawn, non-native lawn that abuts the shoreline area. And I'm leading a bit here, but I wonder if there's a different condition along that 10-foot wide pathway that is not lawn that could offer mitigation in more of a, more of a way of transitioning from the cultivated lawn down to the riparian edge, rather than this pocket of wildlife and pollinator habitat off to the side. That's part statement and question. Sure.
[SPEAKER_03]: Sure. I mean, we could definitely reduce the amount of lawn and bring in more native plant material in there. Absolutely. Yeah, I mean, if I went through the concept of there's. Contextually, a whole lot of things going on, and part of this is being part of the system that goes to the north and south and we've, we've used river's edge as a model to some degree here, because the residential component to create some kind of area that's recreational, that's not as natural. So that is a part of it. And it could be, like, for example, that we, on the right side, on the riverside between the path and the stone wall that would be in place there, we could do above that, we could do a lot more naturalistic native planting. And that way, people could have a little bit of a chance for some kind of recreational stuff down below there between the path. And it's a seat wall, actually, that entire length. So there's a definition of a space and the framing of a space that's happening with that wall that's engaged with the building. I mean, it's such a narrow corridor now. that where you've got the area between where the upper path is about eight feet of grade change at the most extreme. So that's what all those stairs are about. So it's kind of like trying to create a space that's usable and identifiable as a node kind of thing.
[Jeremy Martin]: We can definitely bridge. I see it as a threshold between the building zone and the natural habitat there. That's where personally I would prioritize putting that native habitat area. Thank you for considering that. I noticed that switching to the grading plan here, Retaining wall on the pathway where it meets the edge of the work area on the south is quite a bit into the three to one slope. And I understand this as being coordinated with DCR, but it results in a five foot tall retaining wall at that point. And so I'm flagging that down here at the south end. It seems like some adjustments to the alignment there may be needed to really keep that out of the steeper part of the slope and hopefully avoid such a significant retaining wall that close to the shoreline. Let's see.
[SPEAKER_02]: You're referring to the southern pathway connection to the off-site area, right? Correct. Got it.
[Jeremy Martin]: Yeah. It's a little harder to see in this plan, but in the grading plan, you can see where the 10-foot pathway is well within the steeper part of the bank there. And it doesn't quite look like it aligns with the parking lot, and it may not be intended to align with the parking lot or a connection to the parking lot. But from what I can tell in the Google Earth images, at least the existing condition is that that bike path does connect to the parking lot as it is now.
[SPEAKER_02]: Um, I will say there's a quite extreme grade change in that area, um, out on site. It's quite abrupt right along that Southern area. So I think that design is really driven by that pretty stark change between the MBTA parking lot and the shoreline walkway area.
[Jeremy Martin]: Okay.
[SPEAKER_02]: Thanks. Well, you can go ahead, but I did have a response to an earlier question from the commission regarding the depth to groundwater. I've been informed that there were prior borings on the site before I was involved in the project, but they encountered groundwater about six to seven and a half feet below the existing grade, which is, of course, given the grade changes in the project, a little bit further depth under the proposed condition than the existing. I just wanted to give an initial response to that comment from the commission. Thank you. I'm sorry for cutting you off, Jeremy. Go ahead.
[Jeremy Martin]: It's okay. I think I'm on my last comment here. Thanks for explaining that the pink tree symbols are the Amelanchier. I just would ask that the landscape plan have a schedule associated with it so that we can identify the rest of the proposed trees. I did see in the NOI the list and all of those looked good, but I would like to understand what's being planted. within the riverfront zones and the buffer zone.
[Heidi Davis]: Thank you, Jerry.
[Jeremy Martin]: It's all good. Thank you. Thanks.
[Heidi Davis]: Caroline, before I say anything else, you haven't spoken yet. Do you have any comments?
[EO-vAhUJAKo_SPEAKER_18]: Yeah, just a couple of questions. If we can talk about the DCR footpath for a minute. Is there a reason why that that footpath can't be tied into the path closer to the building?
[SPEAKER_02]: The shoreline 10 foot wide walkway you meant? Yes. Well, I think the design is really driven by the footprint of a previously granted easement that we are attempting to map. Well, it's a long story, but there is an easement attempted to be granted in the past that was never finalized. And we kind of, that was the area intended to be the DCR shoreline walkway area. And we've kind of, matched our proposed design with that easement. It has been shifted a bit further landward from the previous pathway proposal on the site, but I think that's really why you're seeing that kind of in its present location, particularly because to the south of the site, the connection is constrained by the MBTA parking lot. It really can't move any further west than where it's shown now, because there's the parking lot stormwater basin in that area. So I know at least in the southern portion of the site, that was the intent to be able to seamlessly make that connection.
[EO-vAhUJAKo_SPEAKER_18]: Okay. I mean, I get so in the southern portion of the site, you have two paths leading towards the exit from the project site. It seems redundant to have two paths that are going the same place. And I would prefer to see less pavement within the 100 foot riverfront area. So I don't know. I know logistics of an easement are separate. I'm not sure what the, is it the owners granting the easement? But if there is flexibility on that, I don't see why one of those paths couldn't do double duty, and I would prefer the path that's farther out from the river be used as that 10-foot wide path. And I know you probably don't have that answer now, but if it could be looked at and maybe a response, that would be great. I would appreciate that. And the other item on the footpath In the notice of intent, the applicant is claiming exemption as a limited project. I do just note that That is not something that you automatically qualify for. It is up to the commission's discretion. So I would like to discuss with the commission members whether we want to grant limited project status to that footpath. Just given the extent of the project, I'm inclined not to and would like to see the full riverfront area performance standards met, but that will be a discussion item for us commissioners. I get that you're asking us to grant you limited project status for that. I would too if I were you, but just something for the commissioners I think to discuss another time or tonight, whenever. And final comment, I don't know if you've given any thought, two comments, sorry. Could I, could you submit the chapter 91 administrative approval to us just to see it? And then, another comment. I was talking to a Woburn Conservation Commissioner. Is there any plan for pest management surrounding this? I know rodenticides are a big topic right now, and I'd be interested to know if there's any plan for pest management. I know I take the MBTA from Wellington five days a week, so I know there are pests in the area, and certainly the commission would be sensitive to any rodenticide use within the riverfront area. So if that hasn't been given any thought, I'd appreciate some feedback or what the plan would be on that front. And I will pause there and let Heidi take over.
[SPEAKER_02]: Well, perhaps a moment to respond to a few of those comments. JP, did you want to speak a little bit to the design intent of the?
[SPEAKER_03]: Yeah. The reason, a couple of reasons that there's two paths. One is that for ADA compliance, there's just a huge grade change between where the building is and where the the wider 10-foot wide path is. I mean, it's literally eight or nine feet. So you've got a lot to take up there. And on the south end of the plan, literally all the way to the southeast corner of the building, you're just under maximum slopes to conform with an ADA-compliant slope, unless you're going to do some sort of switchback. So the other thing is, the building's big. I mean, let's just be honest. I thought that allowing the public to be a little further away from the footprint of the building would be nicer. So I mean, you know, it's the cross section that we drew is illustrative of a particular series of issues, but it makes it feel very large, the volume of the area, whereas when you get into it, so if we look at this for a second, and I'm Maddie, go back to the plan, please. you look at that diagonally, can you see where the section line is, AA? We wanted to go through a series of issues that were related to water quality measures. And so that section is about three or four times as wide in terms of the part that looks like it's parkland. When you get to the pinch point, It's much smaller, like 70 feet, something like that, 60, 70 feet. When you have a building this large, I thought it'd be helpful as a member of the public to be just a little bit further off. I mean, I also feel like it's a real squeeze between, I mean, part of what Mattie said was absolutely right, that there's an original easement that basically had this alignment, and we just refined it because that's a way that we know with DCR that we're going to be able to get a park built. But I feel like we can look at making it softer. We can look at moving it over 5 or 10 feet closer to the building. But there's a quality of separation between the private element of the building and then the public element of the park, and it's really so compressed here that I was trying to create a little bit of separation for folks in both cases.
[SPEAKER_02]: Okay, thanks. Thank you, JP. And then Jack or Eric, I didn't know if you wanted just a quick word regarding the discussions with DCR and the future easement.
[Jack Englert]: Yeah, so the DCR is looking for an easement from us to complete this path and they've had earmarked funds come and go and I don't know if they're still around to actually do some of the work on the path, but there's a you know, they have gone through quite a process for that location. We did move it westward a bit just to kind of move outside some of the encroachments that they had originally. And I think in our discussions with them, they're excited about it. They like it. They think it works well. They like what we're doing in terms of that pavilion, providing some shelter for bikers and whatever pedestrians as well. And so we've tried to work with them to come up with a plan that kind of fits what they had in mind and what we're doing, but we never did. talk too much like JP was mentioning about moving it close to the building. There's probably a lot of reasons. I understand the reason having one path would be good. And initially I thought that would be the way to go, but then given all the topo that we came to understand, it just seemed like, you know, I'll defer to JP as I always do, but it seemed like this was the path, the location that made the most sense, so. Perhaps DCR could weigh in on that again, but we've kind of tried to accommodate everything that they were trying to do originally and still intend, by the way, to receive those dollars to help with some of the improvements. Now, the fact that we're here and helping out allows them to use some of those dollars to complete the path across the MBTA land as well. So, you know, working together with them, the goal is to get this path that we can connect and, uh, anyway. Just just a little background and my discussions with them.
[Unidentified]: Thank you, Angela.
[Heidi Davis]: Thank you for your comment, Caroline. Along those lines, I would ask if there's any opportunities to reduce the amount of impervious pavement currently proposed. can the path be reduced from 10 feet to 8 feet possibly? I don't know what DCR's standards are generally, but DOT in some circumstances in wetlands or near other resource areas have reduced to 8 feet wide. They would prefer wider, but if you could respond to that a possibility of reduction there. Also, I'm looking at the pavilion seating area. I wonder if there's any opportunities to reduce impervious pavement in that area or to have any pervious pavement, as Jeremy mentioned earlier, in that facility. I would ask you to take a look at just opportunities to reduce impervious area.
[SPEAKER_02]: Yes. Thank you for those comments. We can take a look at that. Great. Thank you.
[Heidi Davis]: Anybody else from the commission have anything further?
[SPEAKER_08]: I have one question about invasive species. If we can jump to that, it just said in the narrative section of your notice of intent, you mentioned invasives will be monitored on an ongoing basis. Could you just provide a bit more color on that and maybe some of that color could be put into the actual monitoring plan that you included as an appendix. I do applaud the team's effort on invasives and in particular an issue close to my heart, the removal of marine debris. So thank you for that. I guess part of what I'm getting at is if there's going to be some ongoing monitoring of the invasive species, would you guys be willing to consider a more systematic debris removal program, you know, in conjunction with that monitoring.
[SPEAKER_02]: Sure, yeah. I mean, in terms of the monitoring frequency, I think we all know sometimes it's tough to eradicate these invasives. Sometimes you don't get them all in the first go around. So I think there's absolutely an intent on an annual basis to review the shoreline area, survey it, see if the eradication has been successful or if more work needs to be done. So to that end, I think on an annual basis, taking a look at that and as necessary going back in and doing further removal is something that we anticipate doing as needed.
[SPEAKER_08]: Yeah, I would appreciate that. And maybe I suggest or the other commissioners could weigh in, at least in the monitoring plan, a commitment of that monitoring for three years, three growing seasons, however you want to term it. That seems reasonable to me. And then as needed on an ongoing basis. And then as for the debris removal, I'm sure your intent is to keep your site clean. Everybody likes a clean site, right? The tougher stuff to get at that your sort of day-to-day maintenance crew might not pick up, I guess, is what I'm trying to get at with the bigger debris that might wash up on the shoreline. So if you would consider something in there about pulling out the sort of bigger stuff on a somewhat regular basis, I would appreciate that, or at least your consideration of that.
[Jack Englert]: I can answer that a little bit. Absolutely, we will consider it. I mean, this is our front door, even though it's public and private, right? So we're going to do everything in our power to make that as inviting as possible. I can tell you, walking down there now, there's a lot of work to do, certainly. And we're thinking that once the project is in place and all of these improvements, it'll be less of an area for people to kind of hide away and store different debris. open for visibility to the public and the residents as well. So I have no issue trying to put in place some sort of a program where we sort of sweep that on a, you know, by every other month or whatever the appropriate amount of time is because it's in our interest as well as the interest of the public.
[SPEAKER_08]: So, yeah, I appreciate that. I appreciate that.
[Jack Englert]: Thank you very much.
[Jeremy Martin]: I have to thank you. Thank you. Thanks for bringing up the indice. I forgot I had some comments there. I was surprised to see that black swallow wart had not been identified out there. I would ask that that be, even if it's not there now, that it be included in the monitoring plan as so much disturbance will happen out here. It's becoming a real problem in Medford and many places around us. I have been reading a lot lately about Tree of Heaven, Ailanthus removal. And the plan, as it's described right now, says that the mature trees will be cut and the stumps treated. What I have read, and I'm curious how this factors into your plans, is that cutting those trees encourages the roots to sucker, and what is one tree will turn into 50 small trees, and that can be managed through a, through, you know, three years of of monitoring and then more as needed. But I have read that a hack and spray treatment before removing the tree is effective at killing the roots as well. And so it asks that you investigate some of that. Similarly, the proposed method of treating the knotweed in the report describes through primarily mechanical methods. There again, I've learned that trying to just manage through mechanical removal often encourages the roots to send up even more shoots and more sprouts. So that may want to be more of a mechanical and chemical treatment method. And then last here is maybe a question for you guys as much as my fellow commissioners, but the plan describes leaving the phragmites or common reed within the two smaller BVW areas and just limiting the treatment to the area around it. That to me suggests that within a few years, we'll just have a population of phragmites taking over again. And I'm curious to hear opinions on whether actually treating within those PVW areas as a part of this plan could be considered, considering the size of them relative to the shoreline. rather than leaving them alone, would we be okay with extending the removal of phragmites into those areas as well?
[SPEAKER_02]: Well, I'm happy to respond to that. Yes, the intent was to avoid impacts to that area, but I think we're happy to hear the commission's feedback on that topic if they think it's an appropriate intervention for the area.
[Heidi Davis]: Do you think it would be appropriate mitigation for riverfront area alterations? Again, echoing what others have said, I greatly appreciate the amount of effort that's been put into the invasive species management plan. And I hope that, you know, with our comments, we can have a more robust plan.
[SPEAKER_12]: Thank you.
[Jeremy Martin]: Yes, let me be clear, despite my very nitpicky comments. I do appreciate it as well. I think I'm getting into the details because we don't often see these level of details in invasive species management plans. So it was very much appreciated. You have said, Jeremy, getting into the weeds with... That's exactly right.
[Heidi Davis]: No, I really appreciate your comments on methods of control, particularly given tree of heaven. Now we don't think that including those in a revised invasive species management plan would be appropriate.
[EO-vAhUJAKo_SPEAKER_18]: Heidi, I just have one question, if I may. When does the applicant anticipate submitting a full planting plan?
[SPEAKER_02]: Jack and Eric, can you hear me?
[Jack Englert]: Certainly, we will submit it whenever you feel that's appropriate. I mean, I think JP, we aren't too far away from having a full planting plan on this project. I don't know if it could be submitted obviously prior to Let's see, what are the next steps here? I would anticipate we could submit it and I don't want to put words in your mouth, JP, but what kind of timeframe do you think you need to submit a planting plan for this project?
[SPEAKER_03]: Well, there's two of us working on it. different areas of the site, so maybe it's worth pointing as well on the eastern side of the path, of the DCR path. But, you know, for our part, I think a couple of weeks.
[EO-vAhUJAKo_SPEAKER_18]: Okay. I'm not holding you to anything more scheduling-wise. I'm just wondering when we might be able to see it and then review it.
[Heidi Davis]: Oh, great. Before we continue with any discussion, I need to ask if there's any members of the public here that would like to comment or ask a question. Okay, hearing none, I'll bring it back to the commission. It seems like we have a number of comments, and so we don't appear to be ready to issue an order this evening. So, we've done actually turn it back to the project team and. Would ask if you're a medical to continue in this year. Yeah.
[Jack Englert]: We're happy to continue the hearing. We are in a little bit of a precarious situation with where we stand on keeping this project alive and not trying to say it's urgent, but it's probably more urgent than a typical situation. So I would ask that our team could get back to you as quickly as possible with the information you've asked for tonight, assuming that we And we haven't been able to answer all the questions, certainly. So as soon as we can get that submitted, we would very much appreciate being back in front of the commission. for a lot of different reasons. And the fact that we're here a couple of years after we started this, not with the Conservation Commission, but just where we are in this project, given how much time we've had on it, speaks to the kind of urgency that we're in. So anyway, to the extent our team can solve this quickly and get it back to you, we would very much appreciate being back in front of you as quickly as possible.
[Heidi Davis]: Understood. Understood. I would suggest that you continue to work on getting your file number as quickly as possible.
[SPEAKER_02]: Yes, understood. We will reach out to Nero about that issue and sort that out as soon as possible.
[Heidi Davis]: Great. And also, as I'm sure you're aware that MBTA sent a letter to the design team today. No, yesterday, sorry. And so their concerns are not directly related to the Wetlands Protection Act, necessarily. They are in a butter. And it is, of course, in your best interest to coordinate with them as soon as possible.
[SPEAKER_02]: Certainly, yes, we got a copy of the letter today and we're happy to have continued conversations with the T about their comments.
[Heidi Davis]: Great, thank you. Do I have a motion from the commission?
[SPEAKER_08]: Yeah, I'll make a motion to continue this hearing. Can we say to our next regularly scheduled meeting, is that feasible for Nati, for your team? I think we would need more than 48 hours to review material, ideally. The sooner the better. But I don't know if we need to state that in a motion, but if not, I would just make a motion to continue this hearing. I'll second that.
[Heidi Davis]: All in favor, Craig? Aye. Eric? Aye. Jeremy? Aye. Caroline?
[EO-vAhUJAKo_SPEAKER_18]: Aye.
[Heidi Davis]: And myself is an aye. Thank you. Can we reschedule to continue the hearing till?
[SPEAKER_08]: Understanding the proponents reasonable urgency here. I think if we could have a couple of days to review what we've asked for that, that works for me. I don't know. I don't want to put other commissioners in the hot seat, but that seems reasonable. That's about the 23rd. Dennis, does that work for you?
[Jeremy Martin]: I'm not sure Dennis can hear us. No, I can't.
[Denis MacDougall]: Sorry, I was sort of waiting. I was over here asking you or asking the applicant. So 23rd is fine. That would just mean we'd have to get stuff in hand by really Monday the 21st then. Friday is even better, but... Yeah, sorry, but yeah. Well, you said 48, so I kind of just went back that way, but yeah. But, I mean, it would have to be, like, 9 a.m. on Monday. You know what I mean? Like, not until, like, you know, you can't wait until, like, 5.30, 6 o'clock. And if you have anything that comes in in the interim, if you have stuff, just get it to us as soon as you get it. You don't need everything all at once at the end. So, the minute you get something, just forward it to us, and I'll forward it off.
[SPEAKER_12]: Understood. Thank you.
[SPEAKER_08]: Thank you, folks. Appreciate it. Thank you very much.
[Heidi Davis]: Thanks for your time this evening, and we look forward to seeing you in a couple of weeks.
[Denis MacDougall]: Just more, Natty, if you could send me a copy of the presentation that you had, just so I can put that up on the Google Drive as well, so we have it.
[SPEAKER_02]: Yes. I actually sent it to you just moments before the hearing started, so I think it should be.
[Denis MacDougall]: I am not at my computer, so I haven't seen my email. I've been trying to figure out a way to get my emails on this computer and I've been unable to. So appreciate it.
[Heidi Davis]: Great. Thank you all. Do we have any minutes to approve, Dennis? I don't think so.
[Denis MacDougall]: I was out for a bit, unfortunately. I was not around. I'm back now, but in the interim, I had five zoning decisions to write that sort of wrecked me for a bit. So, but I know that, but I know what Jeremy wanted to talk about. getting, because we had a member who I thought we were going to appoint, and then in the interim, basically he came back and said this time right now doesn't lend him the ability to join the commission at this point. And Jeremy brought up the point, which is quite accurate, that I'm not sure if the delay in appointing him from when he expressed interest to now played a role. I hope not. But we were having issues, not just for our board, but for a number of boards' commissions. application process was not great and we fixed it we think we've got you know because it was just i don't want to go into like a ton of overall things but it was just applications were coming in and not being seen and i would you know it was just and we not just you all it was like commission was having these issues a few other commissions were having these issues and um it seems to have been sorted so hopefully we can get i put out calls to looking for a few other people, more members. I thought I had another, just during this interim, somebody sent me an email, somebody who works for the state expressed an interest in joining. And then I got back to them within a few days and they were like, actually, no, no, no, we can't. So I was kind of excited for about 48 hours. And then I was like, and then I contacted a friend of mine who works for Myra, asking her if she knew of any folks in the city who might be interested. she forwarded me a name. She basically was like, you know, she basically sent me an email with myself and the other person. And I replied to that person saying, you know, can you send your information? And they never got back to me. So I'm starting to take it personally. But so I it I've contacted the same person again and just said, you know, we'll not go that person's route, but if you know of anyone else, so, you know, I mean, there are a lot of volunteers, you know, people who work for Myra who live in this city. So, you know, I think if someone's interested in helping on Myra, they would be someone who'd be interested in the commission as well. So.
[Heidi Davis]: So Myra just recently convened a steering committee for, I think, revitalization of the bank from the Mystic Lakes to Boston Ave. It's not important what it was, but the steering committee consisted solely of West Bedford residents, and there was like 12 people, 12-15 people. So there's a possible pool if we can be really more specific with my friends and say, hey, we know these people all went and attended several hearings.
[Denis MacDougall]: That's great. All right. I'll go to that round.
[Jeremy Martin]: I wanted to join that steering committee, but I couldn't commit to a third. third thing, unfortunately. It was very interesting.
[SPEAKER_09]: Double duty as it is, Jeremy. We so appreciate you representing us on the CPC.
[Jeremy Martin]: Yeah, and it's been good. Learning a lot there. Dennis, I will say as what I understand from Alex is that it was the delay, not specifically because of the delay, but during that time he was approached to join another board.
[Unidentified]: Oh, jeez.
[Jeremy Martin]: He didn't know what was happening with the ComCom, so he took the other position. That's unfortunate, but OK. It is. So I'm glad to hear that whatever issue it was is resolved. I want to be sure that if any of us are going to recommend someone, and you put yourself out there a little bit by talking up the board, that we can do that with confidence. I appreciate that whatever has been the issue is fixed. I think if we do make more recommendations, let's do whatever we can to bang the drum so that people at the city see it. That's my soapbox. Thank you. I apologize. Again, if you know anyone who
[Denis MacDougall]: is in the city, you know, again, I, you know, we just sort of said, it's just, you know, even if they just, you know, are curious, have them, you know, give me a call, but shoot me an email. They're just, even if they're not, you know, I sort of go over exactly what entails, you know, and just sort of give a brief little intro and, or even, or even, you know, have them come to just watch sort of a meeting from the peanut gallery, you know, sort of, you know, just observe what this commission is like. I think that sometimes helps. people get to sort of see what it is, see what it actually entails.
[Jeremy Martin]: I suspect most of us end up here because we've been on the other side at some point and know the drill. But it is helpful to get the context of what this commission is like and what kind of NOIs and inquiries we deal with versus other places. Dennis, I also, different topic, but I owe you some comments on the South Street planting plan. It looks like it's the same plan that was provided before. I can't remember if I sent you formal comments there or not.
[Denis MacDougall]: I'll try to dig those up, but I do have that in mind. If I do have them, I'll let you know.
[Jeremy Martin]: I can take a look on my end too.
[EO-vAhUJAKo_SPEAKER_18]: Dennis, did we get something in from South Street recently? Because I haven't received anything in the last 30 days.
[Jeremy Martin]: No, I wasn't able to. Well, at least the plans I'm talking about, Caroline, I wasn't able to make the last meeting, and so Dennis sent me the updated plans.
[Denis MacDougall]: We sent some stuff out maybe about four weeks ago, five weeks ago, maybe in that time frame. What we got from the current developer, I think the fourth one we've had. I'll double-check to see what I've got and I'll send it off again.
[Jeremy Martin]: I know you sent that plan to me directly, Dennis, but I'm not sure if it went to the full group.
[Denis MacDougall]: It might have been after the meeting, but I thought it got sent out prior to the meeting, but I will double check.
[EO-vAhUJAKo_SPEAKER_18]: Can you send me a summary, Dennis? I must have missed that meeting at 54 South Street. Come to a meeting?
[Denis MacDougall]: Well, yeah, while you're, uh, I believe you were on your honeymoon. So unfortunately he basically said, and he came, he actually came into the office to speak to me and he was like, I, I'd like to, and I was trying to accommodate both him and us. And he was like, you know, cause especially cause both you and Jeremy were so actively, you know, so expressed interest in it, but he was like, I can't go this and he's like, we'll come next Wednesday. So we did it. Okay.
[EO-vAhUJAKo_SPEAKER_18]: Yeah, that's fine. I'm glad. So what, what happened? What was the update? I would have read the minutes dead, but we don't have any.
[Denis MacDougall]: Yes. Um, he basically went over the plans and basically he just seemed receptive. I mean, it was, it was more of a just sort of formal chat session because it wasn't a formal hearing or meeting or anything. And we just sort of went over the planting plan that was proposed and you know, what was actually in the initial planting plan that we had. But basically we sort of told them that that planting plan was dependent on that tree being there. And now that that tree is not there, you know, I think we did say to him, basically add some additional plantings to what you have to mitigate that tree coming down and yeah, don't believe them yet. But he said he was going to get that to us when he was getting closer to actual plantings. She's said we'll probably be in the next, you know, probably this fall planting season.
[EO-vAhUJAKo_SPEAKER_18]: Okay so yeah it sounds like we can just tell him do x y and z and that's how he'll come back into compliance and it doesn't have to be a long back and forth I don't think we could probably get it done in one.
[Denis MacDougall]: No I mean he was he was fairly receptive you know compared to the previous developers you know once we actually found out his information and getting contact from him because the previous ones were much harder to get hold
[EO-vAhUJAKo_SPEAKER_18]: Okay, thanks.
[Denis MacDougall]: Just other updates. I actually received word from, I was going to say Myra, but it's not Myra, it's MWRA. I think one of our last minutes we talked about the work that was being done by the little High Street Rotary. They were doing, there's some erosion controls and things like that in preparation for some work. They are going to be starting some work there shortly. They just haven't told me when. coming soon and they will let me know actually what is going on.
[SPEAKER_08]: In that same work, I thought they were buttoning that up. That looked like they were done over there, Dennis.
[Denis MacDougall]: It's another one then. I literally just got the email two days ago basically saying so. Then it was that general area.
[SPEAKER_08]: I noticed there's erosion controls up. I think they're new. I've been out of town for a few weeks on Mystic Valley Parkway by Whole Foods, and there's a new DEP file sign up. And at least I think it's new. I've never noticed it before, but granted, it's... It's by Whole Foods, and it's after the bridge, that Somerville. Say that again?
[Denis MacDougall]: Well, Whole Foods The eastern side, like the right hand side of Somerville and the road there, like basically when you, when you, you know, the traffic light before you get to Whole Foods, the one that's there.
[SPEAKER_08]: Yep.
[Denis MacDougall]: After you hit that, that turns into Somerville.
[SPEAKER_08]: Oh, it could be Somerville then.
[Denis MacDougall]: Cause that, that comes off now and again that every once in a while there's work going on. That, it's, it's sort of a weird little sort of stretch that is not Medford that you think should be Medford. And that's happened to me more than a few times is that, yeah, so like the property line, like when you cross over that bridge there after Auburn Street, that is all Somerville. So you can see the line there, yeah.
[SPEAKER_08]: Yeah, and it happens to be in Somerville. So disregard.
[Denis MacDougall]: Yeah, no, there's been a few times where I've gotten calls, and especially when I first started, that I basically raced down there and I was like, oh no, they're doing work here. And I was like, I know not knowledge of it. And I'm not alone. I actually know one of the building inspectors who was driving down there that way and he saw some construction and went in and asked them where their building permit was and they didn't have it. And he wrote them out all this fines and things like that. And then when he got back to the office and he started submitting it, he discovered it was in somewhere. Yeah, they basically called one of his counterparts in Somerville and said, by the way, you should probably go look at this property. So it is kind of strange. Like, you're driving on Boston Ave, you cross over the bridge, and you're in Somerville for a short hop, and then all of a sudden it jumps back to Medford. It's a weird little cutout of the city. And then... We are going to, I'm expecting applications from both from the member. We did the, uh, the initial one on our own street, the African, they just sort of take, we're sort of taking their time. And then actually their next door neighbor wants to do a similar project. So he actually hired an engineering firm to do like all of his stuff. So when I mentioned that to them, they were like, can he kind of go first to sort of get the heavy lifting done with his folks before they come back before us. He just and I just got that yesterday. So I haven't I'm just reviewing it now. So we probably will be having that. I'll be not in the next one, but shortly thereafter, for our industry. That's cool. That's another ally. Nothing else is in the pipeline as far as I know. I haven't heard anything. I will say the Eagle Scout project, I think I might have mentioned it in the previous one, but the Eagle Scout project went very well. I was there for the duration of the project. We managed to get it all done in one day, which was not easy, but it actually made it better for the project. We were able to get the old bridge out, and they actually brought that, they were able to get the old bridge out, which was, not easy. They were basically myself and the scout's father and one other person were waiting down by where they put in their new bridge. And we could just hear them, you know, making their way to us. And it sounded like a tank running through the woods, just them trying to, they didn't want to drag it. So they were kind of lifting it and they got up there. So and the bridge is great. If you haven't gone up there, I would It's been a really nice walk around. It's much better than it was because you're not walking through the big muck of the old pathway. And within about five minutes after they put up the notice redirecting people, two hikers walked through. And they actually followed the new trail. So we were like, all right, everything seems to, the new blazing seems to work. So thankfully, so.
[Heidi Davis]: Thanks for overseeing that. I'm glad it went well.
[Denis MacDougall]: Yeah, that was great. I mean, I like projects like that. Those are my favorite ones. Brett's the old scouter in me, too. I just kind of remember my days doing that stuff like that.
[Heidi Davis]: Look forward to seeing it. But with that, if we don't have anything else, I suggest that we adjourn. second all in favor we could all say that yes and I'll send you off the stuff as soon as I get things great thanks Dennis thank you Dennis and meeting minutes and we didn't write all right bye record