##VIDEO ID:2ir1WCg8DKg##  DISTRICT ONE CITY COUNCILOR AND I'M THE CHAIR OF THE BOSTON CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS. TODAY IS OCTOBER 28TH 2024. THIS HEARING IS BEING RECORDED. IT IS ALSO BEING LIVE STREAMED AT BOSTON DUCK OF FORWARD SLASH CITY DASH COUNCIL DASH TV AND BROADCAST ON XFINITY CHANNEL EIGHT RCN CHANNEL 82 AND FIVE. CHANNEL 964. WRITTEN COMMENTS MAY BE SENT TO THE COMMITTEE EMAIL AT SEAGO AT BOSTON GOV AND WILL BE MADE A PART OF THE RECORD AND AVAILABLE TO ALL COUNCILORS PUBLIC TESTIMONY WILL BE TAKEN AT THE BEGINNING EXCUSE ME . YES IT WILL BE TAKEN AT THE BEGINNING AND END OF THIS HEARING.  IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN TESTIFYING PLEASE EMAIL OUR CENTRAL STAFF LIAISON MEGAN CAVANAUGH AT MEG AND TOKAYEV A AND A G H AT BOSTON DOUG GOV. FOR THE LINK IN YOUR NAME WILL BE ADDED TO THE LIST.  TODAY'S HEARING IS ON DOCKET 1197. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF BOSTON CODE ORDINANCES CHAPTER SEVEN SECTION SEVEN REGULATING RESTRICTIONS ON PARK FRONTAGES THIS MATTER WAS SPONSORED BY COUNCILOR SHARON DURKAN AND REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON JULY 24TH 2024. TODAY I AM JOINED BY MY COLLEAGUES IN ORDER OF ARRIVAL. COUNCILOR FLYNN,  COUNCILOR MURPHY,  COUNCILOR DURKIN, COUNCILOR BRANDON AND COUNCILOR FITZGERALD. I WILL GO TO MY COLLEAGUES FOR ANY OPENING STATEMENTS THEY HAVE STARTING WITH THE LEAD SPONSOR COUNCILOR DURKAN.  THANK YOU SO MUCH CHAIR AND THANK YOU FOR MAKING TIME FOR THIS HEARING AT A VERY BUSY TIME IN OUR LEGISLATIVE CALENDAR.  I PROPOSED ORDINANCE RELATED TO AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATED TO THE PARKING PARKWAYS ORDINANCE WHICH PROVIDES VERY IMPORTANT PROTECTIONS FOR OUR CITY'S GREENSPACE IS BY REQUIRING SETBACKS AND HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS FOR A PARCEL OF LAND ABUTTING THE PARKS. I HAVE INTRODUCED A ONE TIME SITE SPECIFIC EXEMPTION OF THE PROPERTY AT TWO CHARLES GATE WEST FROM THE PARKING PARKWAYS ORDINANCE RESTRICTING BUILDINGS WITHIN 100 FEET OF HISTORIC PARKLAND.  I HAVE WORKED DILIGENTLY WITH COMMUNITY MEMBERS THE BOSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT AND THE PROPONENT TO MINIMIZE HARM TO PARKLAND AND ENSURE THAT THIS EXEMPTION DOES NOT ALLOW FOR ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE PROJECT AS APPROVED BY THE FDA BOARD IN JULY.  THIS ORDINANCE AMENDMENT WAS SUGGESTED BY THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY OF THE BPD IN A LETTER SUBMITTED TO CHEW CHARLES GATE WEST WITH THE PROJECT SORRY SUBMITTED TO THE CHARLES GATE WEST PROJECT PROPONENT ON JANUARY 21ST, 2024 WHICH CONCLUDED BY DIRECT MEANS THAT THE PROPONENTS SEEK AN AMENDMENT TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE FROM THE CITY COUNCIL SO THAT ITS EFFORT TO EXEMPT THE PROJECT FROM THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION DOES NOT SET A PRECEDENT THAT WOULD HAVE SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANT NEGATIVE IMPACTS ON THE ICONIC DESIGN HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AND USER EXPERIENCE OF THE PARK AND PARKWAYS OF THE EMERALD NECKLACE. FILING AN AMENDMENT TO THIS ORDINANCE IS AN IMPORTANT DEPARTURE FROM THE INITIAL BPA PROPOSAL TO SUBDIVIDE THE PROPONENTS PARCEL AND ALLOW FOR THE HEIGHT OF THE PROPOSAL VIA THE SUBDIVISION ALLOWING A SUBDIVISION OF THIS PARCEL WOULD CREATE A HARMFUL PRECEDENT THAT CANNOT STAND PROHIBITING ANY FUTURE PROPONENT WITH A CREATIVE STRATEGY TO SUBVERT COMPLIANCE WITH THE PARK AND PARKWAYS PROTECTIONS IS IMPORTANT FOR FUTURE PROTECTIONS. AMENDING THIS ORDINANCE TO ALLOW FOR A ONE TIME SITE SPECIFIC EXEMPTION TO THE ORDINANCE REQUIRING PASSAGE OF THE BOSTON CITY COUNCIL AND SIGNATURE OF THE MAYOR WHILE RETAINING SIGNOFF OF THE PARKS DEPARTMENT BETTER MAINTAINS THE POWER OF THIS ORDINANCE.  IT IS CRUCIAL THAT WE MAINTAIN THE STRENGTH OF THIS ORDINANCE BY MAINTAINING PROTECTIONS FOR BOSTON'S HISTORIC GREEN SPACES WHILE ALSO ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THIS ONE TIME SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENT CAN SUPPORT SUPPORT THE GROWTH OF THE 2001 FENWAY NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING PLAN FOR IT TO CHARLES GATE WEST. THIS AMENDMENT REPRESENTS A CAREFULLY CRAFTED SOLUTION THAT SERVES BOTH IMPERATIVES. I ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF THIS ORDINANCE AMENDMENT WHEN IT COMES BEFORE THE COUNCIL AND IF ANY OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE GOALS OF THIS AMENDMENT, PLEASE DO NOT HESITATE TO REACH OUT TO ME TO DISCUSS. I LOOK FORWARD TO THE HEARING TODAY AND I'M GRATEFUL TO MY COLLEAGUES FOR SHOWING UP TO DISCUSS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.  COUNCILOR DURKAN COUNCIL FLYNN AND THEN MERCI MURPHY.  THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. MADAM CHAIR. I DON'T HAVE AN OPENING.  THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COUNCILOR MURPHY. THANK YOU AND THANK YOU TO THE SPONSOR FOR FILING THIS AND FOR EVERYONE HERE FOR THIS IMPORTANT CONVERSATION SIMILAR TO WHAT COUNCILOR DURKAN SAID I'M JUST LOOKING FORWARD TO FINDING OUT WHAT PRECEDENTS THIS WILL SET GOING FORWARD AND HAVE THERE EVER BEEN ONE TIME SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENTS THAT WE COULD LOOK AT TO SEE IF IT DID CAUSE ANY FUTURE CONCERN ABOUT ZONING ISSUES? WE TRIED TO GET AROUND BUT LOOKING FORWARD TO BE PART OF THIS CONVERSATION SO THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE. THANK YOU. COUNCILOR BURTON.  GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR. I DON'T HAVE ANY OPENING STATEMENT.  I'M JUST HERE TO LISTEN AND LEARN. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND COUNCILOR FITZGERALD.  THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. NO OPENING STATEMENT LOOKING FORWARD TO THE HEARING. THANK YOU. GREAT. WE'VE BEEN OFF. EXCUSE ME . I HAVE BEEN SENT TWO LETTERS OF ABSENCE FROM MY COLLEAGUES. THE FIRST BEING FROM COUNCILOR LOUIJEUNE. I REGRET TO INFORM YOU THAT I WILL BE UNABLE TO ATTEND TODAY'S HEARING ON DOCKET 1197. THIS PROPOSAL AND CONSIDERATIONS FROM ADVOCATES BOTH ADDRESS IMPORTANT ASPECTS OF DEVELOPMENT AND PRESERVATION AROUND THE BACK BAY FENCE AND EMERALD NECKLACE.  THESE DISCUSSIONS UNDERSCORED THE SIGNIFICANCE OF OUR SHARED URBAN LANDSCAPE PARTICULARLY AS IT PERTAINS TO HISTORIC ENVIRONMENTAL AND ESPECIALLY COMMUNITY CONSIDERATIONS. I TRUST THAT THIS HEARING WILL ALLOW FOR A THOUGHTFUL AND COMPREHENSIVE DIALOG THAT CONSIDERS BOTH THE NEEDS FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND THE COMMITMENT TO PROTECTING BOSTON'S GREEN SPACES. MY STAFF WILL BE PRESENT FOR THE HEARING AND I LOOK FORWARD TO REVIEWING THE INSIGHTS AND OUTCOMES AND SHE ENCOURAGES FOLKS TO CONTACT THE OFFICE IF SHE HAS ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS.  SIMILARLY, WE HAVE A LETTER OF ABSENCE FROM COUNCILOR SANTANA THAT READS I REGRET TO INFORM YOU THAT I AM UNABLE TO ATTEND TODAY'S HEARING ON DOCKET 1197. I RECOGNIZE AND APPRECIATE ALL OF THE WORK THAT THE SPONSOR AND COMMITTEE HAVE DONE TO BRING THIS ORDINANCE TO ITS CURRENT STATE. I HAVE HOWEVER, HEARD FROM SEVERAL COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THIS ORDINANCE AS CURRENTLY DRAFTED AND I AM GRATEFUL TO THE CHAIR SPONSOR AND COMMITTEE FOR PROVIDING TODAY'S HEARING AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR COMMUNITY FEEDBACK. IT IS CRUCIAL THAT THE VOICES OF ALL STAKEHOLDERS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS ARE HEARD BEFORE THE COUNCIL MOVES TO MOVES FORWARD ON THIS ORDINANCE AND I APPRECIATE THE LEADERSHIP OF THE CHAIR AND THE SPONSOR IN ENSURING THAT THE COUNCIL RECEIVES AND DISCUSSES FEEDBACK ON THIS IMPORTANT TOPIC AS THE COMMITTEE DETERMINES THE NEXT STEPS.  THANK YOU. OKAY. AND I JUST WANT TO LET FOLKS KNOW THAT WE HAVE GOTTEN A LOT OF COMMUNITY CORRESPONDENCE WHICH CAN BE FOUND IN THE FOLDER THAT WAS SENT BY MEGAN EARLIER THIS AFTERNOON. SO WITH THAT WE WILL GO TO PUBLIC TESTIMONY FIRST. IF I COULD HAVE THAT LIST OF FOLKS WHO ARE GOING FIRST AND THEN WE'LL GO TO THE ADMINISTRATION WHILE SHE'S GRABBING THE LIST OF FOLKS, I'LL INTRODUCE MEMBERS WHO ARE HERE ON BEHALF OF THE ADMINISTRATION.  WE HAVE LIZA MEYER WHO IS THE CHIEF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FROM THE BOSTON PARKS DEPARTMENT AND I BELIEVE INTERIM COMMISSIONER. CONGRATULATIONS.  AND DIANA FERNANDEZ. YOU BOTH.  WHO'S THE DEPUTY CHIEF OF URBAN DESIGN AT THE BOSTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT.  WE'VE ALSO BEEN JOINED BY BRETT BENSON WHO IS THE PRINCIPAL AT UTAH OAK.  OKAY. SO FIRST WE HAVE TIM HORNE FROM THE FENWAY CIVIC ASSOCIATION AND THEN PAM BEALL FROM THE KENMORE ASSOCIATION AND THEN CELESTE WALKER FROM JAMAICA PLAIN.  YOU CAN GO TO ONE OF THESE TWO AND I WOULD JUST SAY STATE YOUR NAME AND AFFILIATION.  YOU HAVE 2 MINUTES. OKAY. THANK YOU.  THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MY NAME IS TIM HORNE. I'M PRESIDENT AND WITH CIVIC ASSOCIATION AND I HAVE BEEN IN ACTIVE IN FENWAY THINGS FOR THE LAST 30 YEARS WHETHER IT'S REZONING OR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW . I WOULD LIKE TO THANK EVERYBODY HERE AND FOR HOLDING THIS HEARING AND ESPECIALLY THE WORK OF COUNCILOR DURKIN TO ADDRESS NEEDED PROTECTION OF THE PARK AND PARKWAYS ORDINANCE IN THE FACE OF THREATS POSED BY PROJECTS LIKE TO CHARLES GATE WEST. THIS ORDINANCE WAS CREATED TO PROTECT PARK SYSTEMS AND TO SUSTAIN THEIR ECOLOGICAL AND HUMAN BENEFITS FOR THE CITY AND FOR COMMUNITIES. THE FENWAY WHICH EXISTED ALONGSIDE THE NICKLAUS AND IS PLAYED BY PARKWAYS RELIES ON THIS ONE VEHICLE TO PRESERVE OUR OPEN SPACE AND GUIDE APPROPRIATE DEVELOPMENT. THE REASON WE ARE HERE TODAY IS BECAUSE OUR LEGISLATION AND OUR EXISTING ZONING HAS BEEN IGNORED.  TO CHARLES GATE WEST IS A PROJECT THAT IS COMPLETELY OUT OF SCALE. WHY ARE THEY OUTSIDE OF ZONED HIGH END? OUR GUIDELINES.  IT IS SOMEWHAT DESTRUCTIVE TO THE PARKS ORDINANCE MEANT TO PREVENT IT PREVENT THIS KIND OF DEVELOPMENT FROM OCCURRING BECAUSE THE PROJECT ORIGINALLY SOUGHT TO MANEUVER COMPLIANCE TO A PROPOSED PARCEL SUBDIVISION.  WE WERE FORCED TO TAKE A POSITION WITH OUR BACK AGAINST THE WALL. WE DO WANT TO SEE THIS GO THROUGH AND WE'D LIKE TO SEE THIS ORDINANCE PASSED FOR A ONE TIME EXEMPTION. THE LANGUAGE OF THE ORDINANCE,  HOWEVER, DOES NOTHING TO ADDRESS THE LOOPHOLE POSED BY DEVELOPERS POSITION THAT A SUBDIVISION OF A PARCEL EVEN WHEN CONTRAVENING THE INTENT OF PROTECTIVE LEGISLATION OR UNDERLYING ZONING IS A LEGAL RECOURSE TO THIS AMENDMENT. AND BOSTON LEGAL DEPARTMENT HAS KIND OF AGREED TO THAT. THIS LOOPHOLE SHOULD NOT EXIST BUT BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED IT MUST BE ADDRESSED OTHERWISE WE WILL LIKELY SEE SPECULATION AND PROPOSALS THAT WILL CONTINUE TO IMPOSE THEIR WILL ON OUR PUBLIC SPACE IN OUR PARKS. SO FENWAY CIVIC REQUEST THAT WORK BE DONE EITHER WITHIN THIS ORDINANCE AMENDMENT OR IN OTHER LEGISLATION TO PREVENT SUCH SUBDIVISIONS WITHIN AREAS PROTECTED UNDER THE PARKS AND PARKWAYS ORDINANCE.  TO JUST SUM UP BASICALLY THERE'S NO WHEN PARKWAYS ORDINANCE WAS CREATED THERE WAS A HEIGHT LIMIT PUT ON THERE FOR A PURPOSE. IT WAS TO LIMIT HOW MUCH SHADOW AND HOW MUCH DAMAGE WENT ON TO THE PARK. WHEN YOU ALLOW OTHER BUILDINGS TO GROW TALLER THAN THAT EVEN THROUGH A SUBDIVISION AND THEY CAN CAST SHADOWS WHERE BUILDINGS THAT ARE PERMITTED LOWER CANNOT YOU HAVE KILLED THE INTENT OF THAT PIECE OF LEGISLATION? AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT AMENDED AND SOMEHOW STRENGTHENED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR LETTING ME SPEAK. THANK YOU SO MUCH, TIM.  NEXT UP WE HAVE PAM AND THEN CELESTE IF YOU'D LIKE TO QUEUE UP. THAT WAS JUST AT 2 MINUTES. SO THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL . MY NAME IS PAM BEALL. MY ADDRESS IS 644 BEACON STREET. I'M A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER IN KENMORE SQUARE AND I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE KENMORE ASSOCIATION. I'M HERE TODAY TO SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT TO THE PARKS AND PARKWAYS ORDINANCE PUT FORTH BY COUNCIL THE DURKAN.  BY WAY OF BACKGROUND I WAS ALSO A MEMBER OF THE AG FOR THE TO CHARLES GATE PROJECT AND I WAS PART OF THE REZONING EFFORT FOR THE FENWAY IN THE EARLY 2000. I FEEL VERY STRONGLY THAT THIS DESIGNATED GATEWAY PARCEL WHICH ALLOWS FOR DEVELOPMENT WITH INCREASED TASTE AND DENSITY AND WHICH HAS UNDERGONE MANY YEARS OF PUBLIC PROCESS AND REVIEW INCLUDING BPA BOARD APPROVAL ON JULY 18 SHOULD BE SUPPORTED WITH THIS AMENDMENT THAT'S BEEN PUT FORTH TODAY IN RESPONSE TO REQUESTS FROM MANY MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY WHO PREFER THIS AMENDMENT OVER A PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OF THIS PARCEL.  ACCORDINGLY, I ASK THAT YOU ALL VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS ONE TIME SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENT PUT FORTH TODAY BY COUNCILOR DURKAN. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.  THANK HIM. NOW WE HAVE CELESTE WALKER FROM JAMAICA PLAIN.  HELLO.  THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME THE TIME. MY NAME IS CELESTE WALKER AND I AM PART OF THE ARBORETUM PARK CONSERVANCY BOARD AND ALSO A MEMBER OF THE BOSTON PARK ADVOCATES STEERING COMMITTEE. I'M HERE TO SUPPORT THE ALTERNATE OR ADDED LANGUAGE TO THE AMENDMENT FILED BY COUNCILOR DURKAN.  AS COUNCILOR SAID, IT'S THIS EXEMPTION COULD HAVE HARMFUL PRECEDENT ONTO THE PARKS AND WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS CLOSE THE LOOPHOLE PREVENTING THIS FROM EVER HAPPENING AGAIN. SO WE SUGGEST ADDING THIS LANGUAGE BECAUSE IF IT'S NOT ADDED THERE'S NOTHING IN THE CURRENT AMENDMENT THAT PROHIBITS FILING ANOTHER AMENDMENT AND ANOTHER AMENDMENT AND ANOTHER AMENDMENT AS DEVELOPERS COME ALONG AND ASK FOR IT. THERE'S NO LANGUAGE THERE PREVENTING THAT.  SO I ASK YOU TO CLOSE THE LOOPHOLE. I ALSO ASK YOU TO HAVE A WORKING SESSION SO THE COUNCILORS CAN TALK ABOUT THIS AND COME TO A SOLUTION THAT WE ALL CAN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH, CELESTE. AT THIS TIME I'LL NOW PASS IT OVER TO THE ADMINISTRATION FOR ANY OPENING COMMENTS OR TESTIMONY THAT THEY'D LIKE TO PROVIDE. IT'S GOING TO NEED TO COME.  HELLO, I'M ELIZA MYER, CHIEF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT WITH THE PARKS DEPARTMENT AND INTERIM COMMISSIONER AND THANK YOU ALL FOR INVITING ME TODAY AND FOR BEING HERE TO DISCUSS THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE ORDINANCE AS REPRESENTED BY COUNCILOR DURKIN THIS LANGUAGE IS PROPOSED AS AN AMENDMENT IN LINE WITH OTHER AMENDMENTS THAT ARE PART OF THE ORDINANCE WHICH IS SECTION 4-7 DASHBOARD POINT TWO I BELIEVE THE RESTRICTIONS ARE IN PARK FRONTAGES.  THE PARKS DEPARTMENT HAS SEEN MANY PROJECTS OVER THE YEARS THAT HAVE STARTED AT A PLACE WHERE THEY ARE NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE BUT AFTER GOING THROUGH THE THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS AND COORDINATING WITH BPA AND OTHER YOU KNOW NOW THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND OTHER PARKS STAKEHOLDERS AND THE DEVELOPMENT STAKEHOLDERS WE HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN HELPING ALL OTHER PROJECTS SEE THAT THEIR PROJECTS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE.  SO WHEN THE PROJECTS HAVE COME BEFORE THE PARKS COMMISSION THEY HAVE BEEN IN COMPLIANCE BOTH IN TERMS OF HEIGHT AND IN TERMS OF SETBACKS. THIS PROJECT HAS FOLLOWED A DIFFERENT PATH AND FROM AN EARLY POINT IN ITS INTRODUCTION TO THE TO THE CITY AT LEAST TO THE POINT WHERE THE PARKS DEPARTMENT WAS ENGAGED IN THE PROCESS, WE SAW THAT THEY WERE PURSUING A ROUTE THAT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO CIRCUMVENT THE ORDINANCE THROUGH THIS SUBDIVISION AND THAT WAS OUT OF YOU KNOW, NOT CONSISTENT WITH HOW OTHER PROJECTS HAVE PROCEEDED AFTER CAREFUL REVIEW OF THE PROJECT, CAREFUL REVIEW OF THE PARKS ORDINANCE AFTER SOME QUITE A BIT OF WORK BACK AND FORTH WITH THE PROJECT TEAM AND THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, WE CAME TO THE RECOMMENDATION WHICH IS REPRESENTED IN THE LETTER ON BEHALF OF WRITTEN BY THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY OF PARKS COMMISSION ON BEHALF OF THE DEPARTMENT THAT THE ONLY WAY THAT THIS PROJECT SHOULD MOVE FORWARD IS WITH AN AMENDMENT WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH A FEW OTHER PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN AMENDED OVER THE YEARS AND ARE DETAILED IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE ORDINANCE. SO IT IS FOR THAT REASON THAT WE PROPOSE THIS SOLUTION. THE SOLUTION IS SPECIFIC TO THIS PROJECT. WE DON'T SEE IT AS A PATH THAT WE WANT TO PURSUE WITH OTHER PROJECTS. I'VE BEEN REVIEWING PROJECTS ALONG PARKWAYS MY ENTIRE TIME IN THIS ROLE BUT THE PARKS DEPARTMENT WHICH IS NOW ABOUT 12 YEARS THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THIS HAS COME UP AND I HOPE THAT IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE'LL CONTINUE TO SEE. I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS RAISED BY OTHERS HERE AND I'M RECEPTIVE TO THOSE CONCERNS AND I'M INTERESTED TO HEAR ANY INSIGHT AS TO HOW THEY MIGHT BE ADDRESSED AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS.  THANK YOU. THANK YOU, LIZA. DIANA, DO YOU HAVE ANY OPENING TESTIMONY THAT YOU'D LIKE TO SHARE YOU HAVE FOR THE BPA? I JUST THINK FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT I THINK WE'VE BEEN WORKING REALLY CLOSELY WITH LIZA IN THE COUNCIL TO SORT OF TAKE A LOOK AT THIS PROJECT AND IT'S WHOLE I THINK WE'RE IN A MOMENT IN OUR CITY WHERE HOUSING IS A MUCH NEEDED USE AND THE HOUSING PROGRAM THAT'S BEING PROVIDED ON THIS SITE IS SOMETHING THAT WE SEE AS REALLY DESIRABLE AND IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE SORT OF PLANNING PRINCIPLES HAD BEEN LAID OUT FOR THIS PARTICULAR PARCEL AS A GATEWAY AS AS I MENTIONED WE WE AGREE THAT THIS IS NOT A PRECEDENT SETTING EXERCISE AND THAT I BELIEVE THE EXISTING MERCANTILE BUILDING ACTUALLY EXCEEDS THE PARKS ORDINANCE AND THAT THERE MUST HAVE BEEN SOME ACTION AT SOME POINT TO ENABLE IT TO EXCEED THE PARKS ORDINANCE. SO AGAIN WE BELIEVE THIS IS QUITE SITE SPECIFIC AND SPECIFIC TO THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION AND BRINGING THAT IN ALIGNMENT WITH OUR HOUSING GOALS FOR THE CITY.  WE SEE THIS AS A REALLY GREAT PROJECT TO SUPPORT AND WE FULLY SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT THAT THE COUNCIL HAS FILED.  THANK YOU SO MUCH. AND I JUST WANT TO NOTE THAT WE'VE BEEN JOINED BY COUNCILOR BEN WEBER. I APOLOGIZE I DIDN'T MENTION YOU EARLIER AND I ALSO SAID THAT YOU'RE FROM THE BPA BUT IF YOU'RE FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND JUST REALLY QUICK, WHAT IS THE HOUSING PROGRAM ON THE SITE THE LEVEL OF AFFORDABILITY AND THE PRACTICALITY HERE MIGHT BE ABOUT THE OKAY. AND WE CAN PASS IT OVER TO YOU NOW GIVEN THAT YOU ARE SITTING THERE AND I DID I INTRODUCE YOU STEPHEN FROM BRETT BRETT, I APOLOGIZE FROM UTAH. THANK YOU. OKAY, GO AHEAD.  BRETT BENSON FROM UTAH, THE ARCHITECTS OF THE PROJECT WE'RE AN ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN FIRM LOCATED HERE IN BOSTON SO I HAVE A SHORT PRESENTATION AN ON THE SCREEN FOR EVERYBODY TO BUILD A LITTLE BIT ON THE THEMES THAT WE HEARD EARLIER TODAY THIS IS THIS AMENDMENT WOULD ENABLE A PROJECT THAT WOULD PROVIDE 400 APARTMENTS ON THE SITE INCLUDING 68 ON SITE AFFORDABLE APARTMENTS AND I'M JUST GOING TO GO THROUGH THE SLIDESHOW HERE ONE BY ONE. TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT THE EXISTING CONDITIONS ARE.  SO THE EXISTING CONDITIONS ON THE SITE INCLUDE A MERCANTILE BUILDING AS I MENTIONED IT FRONTS ON BOTH IPSWICH AND BOYLSTON STREET. THE IPSWICH STREET SIDE IS A VERY BARREN BLANK MASONRY WALL. THERE IS NO ANY KIND OF CONNECTION TO THE STREET AND THE SIDEWALK ON THE BOYLSTON SIDE IT FRONTS ON THE AARON NICHOLAS PARKWAYS BUT THE SECTION OF THE EMERALD NECKLACE HAS ACTUALLY BEEN QUITE RECONFIGURED IN THE LAST 50 YEARS WHICH I'LL GET INTO IN A MINUTE IN THE UPPER RIGHT CORNER VERY INTERESTINGLY THERE IS AN EXISTING STAIRCASE THAT IS EXTREMELY WELL-TRAVELED. IT CONNECTS IPSWICH STREET WHICH RUNS ON A LOWER LEVEL AND BOYLSTON STREET WHICH RUNS ON AN UPPER LEVEL AND WE SEE QUITE A BIT OF PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC EVEN THOUGH IT'S IN A QUITE A NARROW SPOT IN THE CITY IN TERMS OF ITS OVERALL URBAN CONTEXT IT SITS IN A VERY INTERESTING LOCATION RELATIVE TO THE ACTUAL NECKLACE I WOULD SAY THE PARCEL IS ACTUALLY QUITE UNIQUE RELATIVE TO ITS POSITION IN THE EMERALD NECKLACE WHERE THE PARKWAY IS ACTUALLY INTERSECTS A MAJOR RAILROAD AND AN INTERSTATE HIGHWAY IN THE FORM OF I-90 AND IT ALSO INTERSECTS A OVER THE LAST SAY 6070 YEARS URBAN PARADIGM OF BUILDING TALL BUILDINGS ALONG THE HIGHWAY THE KIND OF SO-CALLED URBAN SPINE OR HIGH SPINE OF BUILDINGS. AND SO YOU FIND AT THIS SITE A VERY INTERESTING CONFLUENCE OF THOSE TWO THINGS OF THE TALL BUILDINGS ALONG THE TURNPIKE AND THEN THE EMERALD NECKLACE ITSELF IN TERMS OF THE FENWAY NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE FANS, THIS SITE ALSO FIGURES QUITE PROMINENTLY IN TERMS OF ITS GATEWAY NATURE. AND SO ALONG WITH THE PIERCE AND NORTHEASTERN'S BUILDING FOR COMPUTATIONAL SCIENCE ALONG HUNTINGTON AVENUE, WE THINK THAT THIS SITE IS ACTUALLY QUITE APPROPRIATE FOR A TALLER BUILDING ONE THAT MARKS AN IMPORTANT GATEWAY TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WILL PROVIDE A REALLY IMPORTANT URBAN LANDMARK THROUGHOUT THE CITY.  THE HISTORY OF THE SITE ACTUALLY IS HAS CHANGED QUITE A BIT OVER THE YEARS ON THE FAR LEFT SIDE THIS IS ON SAID'S ORIGINAL VISION FOR THE SITE WHICH WASN'T EVER QUITE ACTUALLY REALIZED UP UNTIL THE LATE 1950S THE SITE WAS QUITE A BIT MORE URBAN THAN WE SEE IT TODAY WITH THE SIDEWALKS AND ROADWAYS DIRECTLY ABUTTING THE SITE AND GASTON SQUARE FORMING THIS IMPORTANT GATEWAY IN THE 1960S WHEN THE BOCA OVERPASS AND THE TURNPIKE WERE BUILT, THE SITE CHANGED QUITE RADICALLY AND THE SPACE THAT'S OUTLINED IN GREEN ON THAT IMAGE ON THE RIGHT WAS CREATED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OR ITS PREDECESSOR AND REALLY BECAME ESSENTIALLY A BUFFER ZONE BETWEEN A HIGHWAY OFFRAMP AND THE SITE AS IT EXISTS NOW AND THOSE TRANSFORMATIONS CONTINUE SO MASSDOT IS GOING TO BE REBUILDING THAT OVERPASS AND THROUGH VERY SIGNIFICANT COMMUNITY INPUT AND ADVOCACY IT WILL INCLUDE A NEW CONNECTION FROM COMMONWEALTH AVENUE OVER TO BOYLSTON THAT INCLUDES A NEW MULTIMODAL PATH AND PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS.  AND SO THIS THE AREA IN FRONT OF THE SITE WILL CHANGE QUITE RADICALLY ONCE AGAIN I THINK QUITE A BIT FOR THE BETTER AND THAT'S ALL REALLY THANKS TO THE ADVOCACY OF THE OF THE NEIGHBORS IN THE FACE OF MASSDOT AND THIS DIAGRAM WHICH MIGHT BE A LITTLE HARD TO SEE ON THE SCREEN ILLUSTRATES THE FOUR ZONES THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THE AMENDMENT. IT INCLUDES A SETBACK FROM THE GREEN SPACE DIRECTLY ABUTTING THE EMERALD NECKLACE IT PROVIDES FOR A TALLER BUILDING ALONG IPSWICH SO THAT THE IMPACTS OF SHADOW AND WIND ARE REALLY CONCENTRATED ON THE HIGHWAY AND THEN A STEPPING DOWN SO THAT ULTIMATELY THE SHAPE OF THE BUILDING MEETS UP IN PERFECT ALIGNMENT WITH ITS NEIGHBORS ALL ALONG THAT EDGE OF THE EMERALD NECKLACE.  AND ONE IMPORTANT ELEMENT OF OUR PROPOSED DESIGN IS WE ARE CREATING A NEW PUBLIC SQUARE IN THIS IMAGE ON THE UPPER RIGHT ONE THAT IS OPEN TO THE SKY AS WELL AS A NEW PUBLIC ELEVATOR THAT EVERYBODY WILL BE ABLE TO USE THAT CONNECTS IPSWICH TO BOYLSTON.  SO WHAT PREVIOUSLY WAS HIDDEN IN A DARK ALLEYWAY IS NOW GOING TO BE CELEBRATED AS THIS MAJOR URBAN CONNECTION AND THAT WE REALLY SEE AS A GREAT BENEFIT OF THIS PROJECT.  THIS IS A RENDERING OF THAT SPACE CONNECTING IPSWICH. WE'RE KIND OF DOWN IPSWICH STREET LOOKING UP AND CREATING THIS MAJOR URBAN MOMENT AND WE'VE WORKED QUITE HEAVILY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND THE COUNCILOR STAFF TO MAKE THIS SPACE A REALLY WONDERFUL AND PUBLIC SPACE FOR EVERYBODY TO BE ABLE TO USE.  WE'VE ALSO WORKED QUITE HARD TO HARMONIZE THE EDGE OF THE BUILDING AS IT FRONT SIDE OF THE EMERALD NECKLACE SO THAT IT FEELS QUITE A BIT IN HARMONY WITH ALL OF THE PREWAR BUILDINGS ALL ALONG THAT EDGE AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, REALLY TRYING TO PERFECTLY CALIBRATE THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING WITH ITS NEIGHBORS SO THAT IT FEELS VERY MUCH IN KEEPING WITH WHAT WHAT'S THERE NOW AND THE LANGUAGE OF THIS ORDINANCE AMENDMENT PROVIDES FOR THESE HEIGHTS AND THOSE ALIGNMENTS AND JUST A FEW STEPS BACK LOOKING A LITTLE BIT MORE AT THE DESIGN WE'VE WORKED VERY HARD ON THE MASSING AND USING MORE TRADITIONAL MATERIALS THAT WILL FEEL LIKE IT'S IN KEEPING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEN HAVING THAT MASSING STEP BACK SO THAT REALLY THE MASSING OF THE BUILDING IS CONCENTRATED ALONG IPSWICH STREET AND THE TURNPIKE.  THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT THE WIND SHADOW AND SOLAR IMPACTS OF THIS BUILDING AND WE'VE STUDIED IT QUITE QUITE A BIT IN MANY DIFFERENT WAYS.  WE'VE DONE A NUMBER OF SHADOW STUDIES. WE'VE LOOKED AT CUMULATIVE SHADOWS WHICH IS THE IMAGE OVER ON THE LEFT WHERE YOU CAN SEE ALL OF THE AREAS IN BLUE ALL OF THE NEW SHADOWS REALLY ARE CONCENTRATED ON THE TURNPIKE AND IPSWICH STREET WITH SOME COROLLARY OR ANCILLARY SHADOWS THAT HAPPEN AT OTHER TIMES OF THE DAY AT OTHER TIMES OF THE YEAR WE'VE LOOKED ALSO AT VERY FOUR VERY SPECIFIC POINTS IN THE OPEN SPACE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE NOT ADDING ANY UNDUE SHADOWS TO THOSE SPACES AND THE PROPONENT HAS ALSO HIRED AN ARBORIST THAT USES THOSE STUDIES JUST TO DETERMINE THE TYPES OF TREES IN THERE AND IF THEY'LL BE HARMED BY THE SHADOW IMPACTS AND THE CONCLUSIONS OF THOSE REPORTS IS THAT THE TREES WILL NOT BE HARMED BY THE SHADOW IMPACTS.  WE'VE ALSO CREATED A WIND TUNNEL STUDY THREE DIMENSIONALLY AND I TESTED THAT AND HAVE GONE THROUGH A NUMBER OF STUDIES THAT INDICATE THAT THE WIND SPEEDS ARE MITIGATED BY THE SHAPE OF THE BUILDING AND ALL OF THAT IS PROVIDED FOR IN THE LANGUAGE OF THIS AMENDMENT AND THERE ARE NO UNSAFE GUSTS OR UNSAFE CONDITIONS CREATED BY THE WIND OF THIS PROJECT. SO WITH THAT THERE IS A SUMMARY OF THE PUBLIC BENEFITS HERE ON THE SITE THAT I'LL JUST LEAVE UP ON THE SCREEN AND I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE. THANK YOU.  THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. I'LL PASS IT TO THE LEAD SPONSOR FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. THANK YOU SO MUCH CHAIR AND I THINK I NEED TO SET THE TABLE FOR MY COLLEAGUES BECAUSE THERE WAS A BIG DEBATE ON WHETHER WE WOULD HAVE A MEMBER OF THE PROPONENTS TEAM AT THE TABLE HERE WITH US AND I THINK OBVIOUSLY BRETT IS AN ARCHITECT AND A MEMBER OF UTL BUT IS THE ARCHITECT ON THE PROJECT AND WE THOUGHT IT WAS REALLY IMPORTANT THAT HE ACTUALLY PRESENT WHAT THE PROJECT IS SO THAT EVEN THOUGH MY AMENDMENT IS SITE SPECIFIC IT'S IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO KNOW THE CONTEXT THAT WE'RE IN TO TO WHERE WE ARE AT TODAY. SO THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE BPA BOARD I GUESS DIANA FERNANDEZ SO I'M JUST CURIOUS IF YOU CAN GO THROUGH SOME OF THE BACKGROUND OF BCCDC AND HOW THIS PROJECT'S DESIGN CAME TO BE AND THEN BRETT, IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD? ABSOLUTELY. SO I THINK ONE OF THE REALLY CRITICAL ELEMENTS IS THAT THIS PROJECT TEAM HAS BEEN REALLY COLLABORATIVE WITH US AND THE BOSTON CIVIC DESIGN COMMISSION. WE WENT THROUGH A SERIES OF DIFFERENT ITERATIONS AS TO THE SORT OF TIMELINE THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN UNDER REVIEW. WE ORIGINALLY WERE LOOKING AT A DIFFERENT SORT OF MASSING APPROACH THAT SORT OF CONCENTRATED THE SORT OF MASS IN ONE VOLUME AND AS YOU KNOW WAS ARTICULATED IN THE EARLIER PRESENTATION. THERE WAS A DELIBERATE SORT OF STEPPING OF THAT MASSING AND A CARRYOVER OF THAT EXISTING FABRIC.  SO YOU HAD THESE SORT OF REALLY BEAUTIFUL ROW HOUSES THAT OF BUT THE EMERALD NECKLACE AND WE'RE KEEPING IN PACE WITH THAT CARRYING FORWARD THE MATERIAL EXPRESSION AND EVEN THE BASE ARE SORT OF INVERTED RIGHT TO SORT OF PAY HOMAGE TO SOME OF THAT ARCHITECTURAL LEGACY AND THEN REALLY THINKING ABOUT THE CONNECTION OF THE MASS ITSELF BEING VERY MUCH CONCENTRATED ON THE PIKE AND AGAIN THAT WAS DONE IN COLLABORATION WITH THE UTAH ARCHITECTURE TEAM SEEING THE SORT OF SHADOW ANALYSIS COME THROUGH AND HELPING US SORT OF WORK THE MASSING IN ORDER TO REDUCE IMPACTS FOR BOTH WIND AND SHADOW AND THIS THIS WENT THROUGH A LOT OF BACK AND FORTH. THERE WAS EVEN DESIRE DURING THE MEETING TO SORT OF LOOK AT A SORT OF , YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT MASS AND THE TEAM WAS REALLY RESPONSIVE AND THE COMMISSIONERS CAME TO REALLY LOVE THE LATEST ITERATION ITS ARTICULATION, THE FINESSING, THE DETAILING AND IT WAS APPROVED WITHIN THE BCCDC AS SOMETHING THAT WAS WOULD BE RECOMMENDED TO A BOARD AND WITH SUBSEQUENTLY APPROVED AT THE BPA BOARD. SO WE DO THINK THAT WE'VE WORKED REALLY HARD TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE MITIGATING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT WHILE STILL ALLOWING FOR FOUR 100 PLUS UNITS TO TO BE AVAILABLE ON THIS SITE IN AN AREA WHERE WE NEED HOUSING. AND DIANA, ONE THING I WANTED TO ADD WAS OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE BEEN AT THE TABLE WITH THE PARKS DEPARTMENT WITH THE PROPONENT FOR A REALLY LONG TIME AND PARTLY WHY THIS AMENDMENT IS SO IMPORTANT IS THAT THOSE CONVERSATIONS THAT ARE POSSIBLE ALL AND ARE POSSIBLE ARE ARE POSSIBLE BEHIND THE SCENES REGARDING SUBDIVISION AND AND ALL OF THIS AND WHAT IS POSSIBLE TO HAPPEN BEHIND THE SCENES IS NOT WHAT I THINK SHOULD BE PRECEDENT SETTING FOR THE CITY SO MY WILLINGNESS TO STICK MY NECK OUT HERE TO AMEND THIS SPECIFIC ORDINANCE IS REALLY ABOUT THE IT'S ABOUT IT'S NOT ABOUT ALLOWING FOR THE PROJECT FOR ME IT'S ABOUT CREATING AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE THESE DECISIONS AND THESE TRADE OFFS THAT ARE TAKING PLACE ARE TRANSPARENT OUT TO THE COMMUNITY. I HAD COMMUNITY MEMBERS OVER A YEAR AGO ASKED ME TO AMEND THE ORDINANCE AND MY INITIAL REACTION WAS WHY WOULD I GET MYSELF IN THE MIDDLE OF AN OLD ORDINANCE THAT IS GOING TO CREATE IS GOING TO, YOU KNOW, HAVE YOU KNOW, A LOT OF DIFFERENT OPINIONS, A LOT OF DIFFERENT STAKEHOLDERS COMING TO THE TABLE IN A WAY THAT SORT OF OPENS UP OLD WOUNDS AND WOUNDS AND OTHER ISSUES OF THE PARK SYSTEM.  AND THE REASON WHY I'M DOING IT IS BECAUSE I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE CREATE A PRECEDENT HERE THAT IF YOU ARE GOING TO THERE'S NO WAY TO SERVE THIS IS THE THIS IS THE PROPER WAY IS TO GO BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL AND SEEK A SUBDIVISION LIKE THE PARKS FIRM IT CALLS FOR IN THE LETTER THAT I READ A QUOTE FROM FROM JANUARY 31ST WHICH I KNOW I PRINTED FOR ALL MY COUNCIL COLLEAGUES.  SO LISA, JUST I'M CURIOUS OR INTERIM COMMISSIONER IN THIS JANUARY 31ST LETTER THE PARKS DEPARTMENT ASKS IF THE PROPONENT IS TO MOVE FORWARD THAT THEY SHOULD SEEK A SUBDIVISION.  CENSUS HAS GONE THROUGH THE JULY EPA BOARD IS THIS DOES THE PARKS DEPARTMENT BELIEVE THIS IS THE APPROPRIATE APPROACH AND OBVIOUSLY WE HEARD FROM SOME TESTIMONY STARTING OUT AND I THINK IT WAS REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE STARTED OUT WITH PUBLIC TESTIMONY THAT PEOPLE WANT TO CLOSE THE SUBDIVISION LOOPHOLE. MY SPECIFIC POSITION ON THAT RIGHT NOW IS THAT THIS SUBDIVISION LOOPHOLE IS SOMETHING THAT I'M TRYING TO PROACTIVELY SAY YOU NEED TO AMEND THE ORDINANCE IN ORDER TO IN ORDER TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PROJECT WHICH I THINK CREATES A PRECEDENT CREATES A LEGAL PRECEDENT THAT THIS IS THE WAY FORWARD IS AMENDING THIS ORDINANCE. THAT BEING SAID, I HAVE PROMISED AT LEAST TO MY CONSTITUENTS THAT I WILL NOT AMEND THIS ORDINANCE AGAIN IN MY TIME ON THE BOSTON CITY COUNCIL I DON'T THINK THAT THIS IS THE LAST TIME THIS ORDINANCE WAS AMENDED WAS 1985. SO I DON'T THINK THAT I DON'T THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE AMENDING THIS ORDINANCE TO ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECTS.  BUT THE 2002 FENWAY'S ZONING CALLED FOR THIS TO BE A GATEWAY PARCEL. SO THAT ALREADY WAS IN DISAGREEMENT WITH THE PARKS FRONTAGE ORDINANCE. SO I THINK TODAY WE ARE WE ARE DELVING INTO AN ISSUE THAT IS 23 YEARS OLD. WE ARE DELVING INTO AN ISSUE ABOUT AND THOUGH I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TIM WARREN WAS HERE FROM THE FENWAY CIVIC ASSOCIATION THIS DOES NOT THIS THIS IS AND I NEED TO BE CLEAR THIS DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE 22 ZONING BUT THIS IS A GATEWAY PARCEL AND THERE WAS ALREADY A DISAGREEMENT WITH THE FENWAY ZONING AND THE PARK FRONTAGE ORDINANCE AND SORRY I'M GOING ON FOR SO LONG I JUST FEEL IT I FELT THE NEED TO READ THIS ALL INTO THE RECORD. BUT LISA, CAN YOU ANSWER SORT OF WHAT THE PARKS DEPARTMENTS AND I KNOW I'M OVER BUT WHAT THE EXPERIMENT'S POSITION IS ON THIS APPROACH OF A ONE TIME SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENT? YES. SO JUST TO BE CLEAR THE ONE TIME SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENT IS TO NOT ALLOW THE SUBDIVISION BUT TO EXEMPT THIS PROJECT FROM THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION WHICH IS HOW IT'S WRITTEN. YES.  AND I'LL JUST ADD THAT THE WAY THAT IT'S ALSO WRITTEN IS IT ONLY ALLOWS FOR THE CONFINES OF THE APPROVED JULY BOARD PROJECT.  IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT WE'VE WE'VE PUT IN THE SETBACKS AND EVERYTHING EXACTLY THE WAY AND WE'VE ACTUALLY PUT A HEIGHT RESTRICTION ONLY TO ALLOW FOR THE HEIGHT OF THE APPROVED PROJECT WHICH WAS ACTUALLY WAS ACTUALLY SUGGESTED BY THE EPA.  YES. WHICH MAKES A LOT OF SENSE. SO THIS PROJECT WHICH WILL STILL NEED TO COME BEFORE THE PARKS COMMISSION BECAUSE IT'S STILL WITHIN 100 FEET OF A PARK WHICH IS THE TRIGGER FOR PROJECTS TO COME BEFORE THE COMMISSION FOR APPROVAL. AND WHEN THE PROJECT COMES BEFORE THE COMMISSION IT WILL BE REVIEWED AGAINST THE THE ORDINANCE AND THE AMENDMENT SHOULD THE AMENDMENT PASS IT WILL ALSO BE REVIEWED FOR ANY IMPACTS. YOU KNOW, ON THE OPEN SPACE AND THEN ANY OTHER ISSUES OR CONCERNS THAT ARE RAISED BY BY THE COMMISSIONERS. BUT IN IF THIS AMENDMENT IS ADOPTED THEN THE PARKS COMMISSION WOULD BE IN A POSITION WHERE THEY COULD APPROVE IT BECAUSE THE PROJECT WOULDN'T BE IN CONFLICT WITH THE RESTRICTIONS ON ON ON HEIGHT AS THE ORDINANCE IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN. AND I THINK THAT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT POINT THAT YOU'VE MADE BECAUSE I KNOW THAT SOME OF THE FOLKS WHO HAVE REACHED OUT CONCERNED ABOUT THE PROJECT AND ABOUT THE AMOUNT THAT MY AMENDMENT TEXT HAVE NOT REALIZED THAT IT NEEDS TO GO THROUGH THE PARKS COMMISSION AGAIN.  SO THAT'S REALLY HELPFUL CONTEXT. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH. SHARE THANKS FOR YOUR PATIENCE. THANK YOU. OF COURSE YOUR LEAD SPONSOR YOU GOT A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME I FORGOT TO MENTION THAT I'M ALLOWING FOR 6 MINUTES FOR EVERYBODY. NEXT UP WE'LL GO TO SINCE COUNCILMAN ONE IS NOT HERE COUNCILOR MURPHY I HAVE 6 MINUTES. THANK YOU TO FOLLOW UP ON WHAT COUNCILOR DURKAN WAS SAYING IF THIS IT SEEMS AS THOUGH WITHOUT THE AMENDMENT THE PARKS DEPARTMENT YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO APPROVE IT BUT IT'S ALSO SOUNDS CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG THAT YOU WOULD WANT TO APPROVE IT IT'S JUST THAT THIS IS TYING YOUR HANDS TO APPROVE IT.  THE PROPONENT HAD PROPOSED A WAY TO PRESENT THIS PROJECT BEFORE THE PARKS COMMISSION THAT WOULD HAVE SUBDIVIDED THE PARCEL WHICH WOULD HAVE STILL ALLOWED THE PARKS DEPARTMENT TO APPROVE IT BECAUSE OF THE SUBDIVISION. SO IT WAS A WAY OF SKIRTING FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION AND SAYING THAT THE PARCEL DOESN'T NEED TO COMPLY BECAUSE BECAUSE IT'S TWO SEPARATE PARCELS. SO I THINK THAT THAT APPROACH WOULD HAVE PUT THE PARKS COMMISSION IN A POSITION TO YOU KNOW, A TRICKY POSITION BUT ONE THAT THEY COULD HAVE APPROVED IT KNOWING THAT UPON APPROVING IT THEY ARE ESSENTIALLY OPENING THE DOOR TO OTHER PROJECTS TO SAY I THINK WE SHOULD TAKE THIS SAME APPROACH AND SUBDIVIDE OUR PARCELS SO THAT WE DON'T NEED TO COMPLY WITH THE PARKS AND THAT'S WHAT I WORRIED ABOUT RIGHT.  BUT SINCE THIS WAS PRESENTED BY COUNCIL DURKAN AND WE'VE HEARD FROM PUBLIC TESTIMONY ALSO THAT PEOPLE WANT ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE TO CLOSE THE LOOPHOLES IF THE ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE WAS ADDED BEFORE IT GOES BEFORE YOU AND TO THE PLANNING BOARD, WOULD THAT ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE CHANGE YOUR OPINION ON PASSING IT? WOULD WE STILL END UP WITH THIS PROJECT GOING FORWARD US APPROVING IT AND STRONGER LANGUAGE THAT IS CONCERNING TO SOME MEMBERS IN THE COMMUNITY?  I THINK THERE ARE A FEW DIFFERENT PIECES OF ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE THAT HAVE BEEN PROPOSED AND THERE I THINK THE PARKS COMMISSION NOT THAT I CAN SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE ENTIRE PARKS COMMISSION BUT ON BEHALF OF MYSELF WOULD HAVE DIFFERENT CONCERNS WITH DIFFERENT PIECES. SO IF IT WAS THE SUBDIVISION PIECE IN AND OF ITSELF, I DON'T THINK THAT THAT MEANING ONE OF THE PIECES OF LANGUAGE OR PROPOSED EDITS WAS TO SAY THAT NO OTHER PARCELS CAN ADOPT THE SUBDIVISION APPROACH WHICH I DON'T THINK THE PARKS COMMISSION WOULD HAVE A PROBLEM WITH BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IF THAT'S WHAT IT WILL I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WILL BE INCLUDED IN THIS OR NOT. I DON'T I THINK TOO FOR THAT LANGUAGE. BUT HOW DO WE KNOW I MEAN IF YOU CAME TO US A FEW YEARS AGO AND SAID THAT THIS MAY COME FORWARD TO US AND WE'D WANT TO BUILD ON THIS PIECE OF LAND, MANY PEOPLE WOULD SAY ABSOLUTELY NOT AND HOW DO WE KNOW SITTING HERE NOW IF SOMETHING EVEN BETTER THAT WOULD FIX LIKE YOU TALKED ABOUT THE HOUSING CRISIS AND SO WHY WOULD WE WANT TO PUT LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT SAYS NEVER YOU KNOW THAT OR THAT I WILL NEVER COME AGAIN FOR AN AMENDMENT? I MEAN WHAT IF YOU IF SOMETHING ELSE COMES ALONG THAT IS EVEN MORE BENEFICIAL TO THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUTURE HOLDS, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S COMING BEFORE US. I IT'S AN EXCELLENT QUESTION. I THINK THE WAY WE WERE LOOKING AT THIS IS THAT WHAT'S BEFORE US TODAY IS BASICALLY ALLOWING FOR THERE TO BE MORE HEIGHT FOR IT TO BE PERMISSIBLE, TO BUILD MORE HEIGHT ON THE PARCEL IN ALIGNMENT WITH WHAT WAS APPROVED AT THE PLANNING BOARD SORRY THE BPA BOARD AND THAT THAT IN OF ITSELF TO LISE THIS POINT ISN'T OPENING UP THE GATES FOR FURTHER SUBDIVISION OF OTHER PARCELS ON SPECIFIC QUICKLY BECAUSE I WILL RUN OUT OF TIME SO THE HEIGHT IS CONNECTED TO THE SHADOWS AND THE STUDIES ABOUT YOU KNOW THE NEGATIVE IMPACT SHADOWS CAN HAVE. ARE THERE SPECIFIC PROJECTS PARCELS THAT WERE NOT APPROVED BECAUSE OF THE SHADOWS THAT NOW THIS HEIGHT IS GOING TO CAST THE BECAUSE I HEARD THAT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE PAST PROJECTS WERE NOT ABLE TO BUILD AS HIGH OFFER AS MANY APARTMENTS WHATEVER IT WAS WERE BUILDING BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE CAST A SHADOW THAT NOW THIS TALLER BUILDINGS COMING ALONG AND CASTING THE EXACT SAME SHADOW INTO THAT SPACE CAN WE GET THE SPECIFIC PROPERTIES THAT WERE AFFECTED BY THAT AND IS THERE SOME WAY TO THEN GO BACK AND REASSESS WHAT MAYBE THEY WOULD WANT TO DEVELOP DIFFERENTLY NOW BECAUSE IF THE ONLY REASON THEY WERE DENIED IS BECAUSE OF A SHADOW IMPACT THAT IS NOW COMING ANYWAY WITH THE LOOPHOLE NOT WITH JUST CHANGES LAW LIKE A ONE TIME CHANGE OR, A ONE TIME ACCEPTANCE TO I SPEAK FOR OTHER PROJECTS THAT HAVE SORT OF COME BEFORE US BUT WE HAVE BEFORE US TODAY AS A WAY IN WHICH WE'VE ARTICULATED THE MASSING IS TO PUT THE MASSING CLOSEST TO THE HIGHWAY AND I THINK UTAH CAN SPEAK TO THIS MORE DIRECTLY BUT WE'VE WE'VE MINIMIZED THE SHADOW AND IMPACT IN A WAY WHERE IT IS NOT IMPACTING THE EMERALD NECKLACE TO TO A HIGH DEGREE AND THAT'S BECAUSE WHERE WE PUT THE ACTUAL HEIGHT AND SORT OF STOP GAP DOWN I THINK YOU MAY BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO THAT MORE DIRECTLY. WHAT THE ORDINANCE PROVIDES FOR IS A REQUIREMENT THAT THE BUILDING AS IT OR ANY BUILDING ON THE PARCEL AS IT MEETS THE PARKWAYS WHICH I THINK YOU CAN SEE IN THE DARK BLUE IN THIS IMAGE IS AT ITS LOWEST POINT AND THEN AS IT GETS FURTHER AND FURTHER FROM THE PARK AND CLOSER TO THE TURNPIKE IS WHERE THE BUILDING GETS TALLER. SO WHETHER IT'S OUR DESIGN OR A DESIGN SIMILAR TO THIS THAT FITS WITHIN THAT THESE CONFINES THE SHADOW WILL BE MINIMIZED ON THE PARK IT REALLY PROVIDES SO THAT THE TALLER PORTION CASTS SHADOWS ON THE TURNPIKE AND KEEPS THEM OFF OF THE PARKWAYS . I THOUGHT THAT WHEN YOU PRESENTED IT WAS GOOD. THANK YOU.  THANK YOU. THANK YOU COUNCILOR MURPHY. RIGHT. IT'S 6 MINUTES. COUNCILOR BURTON IS THERE A DESIRE ON THE PART OF THE ADMINISTRATION TO CLOSE THE SUBDIVISION LOOPHOLE?  I THINK THAT THIS ISSUE IS GOING TO COME UP AGAIN.  I'M JUST WONDERING WHERE DO YOU STAND ON THIS?  THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT'S COME UP.  I HAVE NO WAY OF PREDICTING IF IT WILL COME UP AGAIN. I THINK IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THERE WOULD BE PROPERTY OWNERS WHO COULD SEE THIS AS A AS A WAY OF APPROACHING DEVELOPMENT OF THEIR PROPERTY THAT THEY HADN'T IMAGINED BEFORE. BUT I BUT I REALLY DON'T HAVE A WAY OF GAUGING THAT.  I THINK THAT PARKS VALUES THIS ORDINANCE FOR THE PROTECTION THAT IT HAS PROVIDED TO THE EMERALD NECKLACE AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN UPHELD THROUGH, YOU KNOW, PROJECT AFTER PROJECT AFTER PROJECT ACROSS MANY YOU KNOW, NOT JUST THIS PARTICULAR PARKWAY BUT MULTIPLE PARKWAYS ACROSS THE CITY AND PARKS WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE PROTECTIONS THAT THIS ORDINANCE AFFORDS IS SUSTAINED GOING FORWARD. NOW IF THAT MEANS WE NEED TO ADDRESS ANTICIPATE THAT THAT THIS THIS SUBDIVISION LOOPHOLE IS GOING TO CONTINUE AND WE NEED TO GET ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE IN THERE, THEN I THINK WE WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT.  BUT THERE MAY BE OTHER THINGS THAT COULD COME OUT OF THE WOODWORK TOO THAT MIGHT ALSO BE SOUGHT AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT ALL THOSE ARE BUT WE DO DEFINITELY THINK THAT THE PARKWAY ORDINANCE IS AN IMPORTANT PROTECTION FOR PARK LAND SO IT'S IMPORTANT TO US TO SEE IT.  AND THEN THE OTHER THING TO BEAR IN MIND IS THAT THIS GOES WAY BEYOND THE EMERALD NECKLACE IN TERMS OF PARKWAYS LIKE COMMONWEALTH OF AS A PARKWAY THE WHOLE WAY TO BOSTON COLLEGE . I THINK THAT'S WHERE THE 1985 AMENDMENT CAME IN BECAUSE THERE WERE SOME VERY TALL HIGH RISE MULTIFAMILY, SOME WIND UP AND I THINK THE PARKS COMMISSIONER AT THE TIME OR WHOEVER WAS BROUGHT FORWARD THAT AMENDMENT TO STOP FURTHER HIGH RISE DEVELOPMENT ON CAMPUS. SO I, I THINK MAYBE WE NEED TO HAVE A REVIEW OF THE WHOLE THE WHOLE TAPESTRY SO TO SPEAK AND LOOK AT YOU KNOW THIS IS A VERY SPECIFIC LOCALIZED CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS ONE PROJECT. BUT I THINK IN OF THINKING ABOUT WHERE WE GO FORWARD WITH THIS IN THE FUTURE WE PROBABLY NEED TO HAVE A BIGGER CONVERSATION, A MORE INVOLVED LONGER TERM CONVERSATION TO LOOK AT PRESERVING A GREEN SPACE LIKE CONEMAUGH WE REALLY NEED TO GREEN IT OUT THERE AND ADD MORE GREENERY AND MAKE IT MORE PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FRIENDLY ETC. AND THEN THE ISSUE OF ADDING MORE DENSITY ALONG THE CORRIDOR IS ALWAYS SO MUCH PRESSURE ON HOUSING THERE'S ALWAYS AN INTEREST IN ADDING MORE. SO I'M SURE THIS IS NOT THE LAST TIME WE'RE GOING TO BE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION. SO RATHER THAN HAVING TO BE IN A PROACTIVE SORT OF REACTIVE POSITION ALL THE TIME THEN MAYBE MAYBE WE SHOULD HAVE A MORE A MORE OPEN AND INFORMED CONVERSATION ABOUT THE WHOLE THE WHOLE PIECE AT THIS AND NOT NOT NOT YOU KNOW, NOT EXCLUDING THIS THIS PROJECT'S PROBABLY ALL DONE AND DUSTED SO TO SPEAK . BUT THINKING ABOUT WHERE WE GO AFTER THIS BECAUSE I THINK THIS THIS ISSUE IS GOING TO COME UP AGAIN AND AGAIN. I'M THINKING IN TERMS OF THE PLANNING FOR THE CITIES.  YOU KNOW THIS THIS ORDINANCE HAS SERVED US WELL FOR A VERY LONG TIME IN TERMS OF PROTECTING OUR GREEN SPACE. SO BUT WE ARE UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE TO TRY AND ADD MORE DENSITY AND AND WE CAN DO BOTH I THINK IF WE DO IT THOUGHTFULLY AND AND NOT JUST DO IT ON A CASE BY CASE PROJECT WITH SORT OF SMART ZONING OR WHATEVER WE DO LIKE WE NEED TO WE NEED TO BE ON TOP OF THIS. I THINK THAT'S MORE OF A COMMENT AND A QUESTION, MADAM CHAIR, BUT I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT. CAN I JUST ADD TO THAT COMMENT QUICK WITH THE QUESTION I THINK FROM FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE AS A PLANNING PROFESSIONAL, RIGHT, THIS IS WHAT YOU DO EVERY SINGLE DAY. WHAT BENEFITS DOES A TOOL LIKE SUBDIVIDING A LOT PROVIDE FOR A PROPONENT LIKE WHAT IS WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF A SUBDIVISION IF NOT TO GET MORE DENSITY? HAVE YOU SEEN IT UTILIZED ANY OTHER WAY IN ANY OTHER PROJECT ? I THINK YOU KNOW THE SUBDIVISION TOOL IS USED FOR MANY DIFFERENT PURPOSES IN TERMS OF THE PROJECTS WE REVIEW I THINK IN THIS INSTANCE RIGHT IT WAS ABOUT BEING ABLE TO SORT OF ACHIEVE A HAVE A DENSITY PROGRAM RATE THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR HOUSING TO BE PERMISSIBLE ECONOMICALLY VIABLE ON THE SITE WHICH WERE THE PARAMETERS THAT THIS TEAM WAS WORKING WITH THEN I THINK ONE THING I DO WANT TO KNOW RIGHT IS THAT WHAT'S WHAT'S BEFORE US TODAY IT'S ACTUALLY NOT SETTING ANY NEW STANDARD OR NEW PRECEDENT THAN WHAT HAS BEEN DONE BEFORE. RIGHT. THIS HAS BEEN THE WHAT IS PROPER US TODAY WITH AMENDING THE ORDINANCE WAS DONE IN 1985 AND IT'S SORT OF SETTING A VERY HIGH BAR RIGHT FOR ANY YOU KNOW, MOVING AWAY FROM SUBDIVIDING THE PARCEL ITSELF BUT BEING ABLE TO SAY THE ONLY WAY IN WHICH WE COULD ALLOW FOR GREATER HEIGHTS AND WHAT'S IN THE ORDINANCE IS ACTUALLY RIGHT GOING TO CITY COUNCIL RIGHT AND AMENDING THE ORDINANCE ITSELF AND THAT IS SUCH A HIGH BAR THEN BEING ABLE TO YOU KNOW,  HAVE HEAVY OPPONENTS COME IN AND ASK US TO SUBDIVIDE AND ONE OTHER THING TO NOTE TOO IS JUST IN TERMS OF THE PROPERTIES THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR SUBDIVISION THERE ARE VERY FEW ALONG THESE PARKWAYS JUST GIVEN THIS IS GIVEN THE GEOMETRIES THAT I THINK WERE LAID OUT IN THE EARLIER PRESENTATION AND HOW THIS PARCEL CAME TO BE. IT HAD SOME UNIQUE PROPERTIES THAT MADE IT DESIRABLE FROM A SUBDIVISION STANDPOINT BUT THAT'S NOT THE CASE ALONG THE MAJORITY OF THE PARKWAYS.  THEY'RE QUITE CONSISTENT IN TERMS OF THEIR PERSONALIZATION AND MANY HAVE BEEN BUILT OUT TO THE ORIGINAL HOMESTEAD VISION AND WHILE I UNDERSTAND THAT WE'VE ALSO BEEN JOINED BY BRIAN AS WELL BUT WHILE YOU ARE BRINGING THIS UP AND WHILE WE'RE ON THE TOPIC, I WAS GOING TO ASK WHAT QUALIFIES A GATEWAY PARCEL LIKE WHAT DO WE HAVE ANY STIPULATIONS AS TO WHAT WOULD GET SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS LIKE ARE THOSE ALREADY IDENTIFIED IF WE'RE DOING LIKE A MASS LIKE AUDIT OF ALL OF THE PARCELS IN THE CITY OF BOSTON IF WE'RE REZONING IS THERE SOMEPLACE THAT WE CAN POINT TO AND SAY THIS IS CONSIDERED A GATEWAY PARCEL AND SO THEREFORE THIS IS WHAT YOU'LL BE ALLOWED TO DO BECAUSE I'VE HEARD GATEWAY PARCELS BE USED MANY TIMES BEFORE INCLUDING IN MY OWN DISTRICT IN THE NORTH END. BUT ARE THERE ANY SPECIFIC SPECS I GUESS IF YOU WILL THOUGH THAT YOU CONSIDER FOR THESE SORT OF PARCELS?  ABSOLUTELY. SO I THINK FROM A PLANNING PERSPECTIVE IT'S KIND OF BUILDING ON KEVIN LYNCH'S SET OF PLANNING GUIDELINES TO SORT OF IDENTIFY SAYING YOU KNOW, A GATEWAY IS REALLY A UNIQUE PARCEL THAT'S AT A CROSSROADS. RIGHT. THAT IS SORT OF EITHER AT A SET OF UNIQUE INTERSECTIONS COMING TOGETHER A PROMINENT LOCATION WHERE IT IS VISIBLE FROM MULTIPLE VANTAGE POINTS IN THIS CASE I-90, THE OVERPASS, THE THE SORT OF YOU KNOW, BACK BAY AND KENMORE SQUARE ALL SORT OF LIKE CONVERGING IN THIS AREA IN A VERY UNIQUE WAY. SO IT YOU KNOW, STARTS TO SORT OF SET THE FRAMEWORK RIGHT FOR A LOCATION WHERE YOU HAVE WHAT WE LIKE TO CALL IN THE PLANNING WORLD A NODE. RIGHT. IT'S IT'S AT IT'S AT A POINT IN WHICH YOU HAVE A LOT OF SORT OF ENERGIES THAT ARE COMING TOGETHER FROM VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN AND STANDPOINT AND IT CAN BECOME SORT OF A LEGIBLE WAY IN WHICH PEOPLE ORIENT THEMSELVES IN TERMS OF HOW THEY NAVIGATE A CITY AND YOU KNOW WE USE A PRU AND WE USE THE YOU KNOW, THE THE HANCOCK BUILDING AS SORT OF WAYS IN WHICH TO ORIENT OURSELVES AROUND THE CITY AND THOSE ARE USUALLY WAYS IN WHICH WE THINK ABOUT GATEWAY PARCELS AND THE OPPORTUNITY FROM AN ARCHITECTURAL STANDPOINT TO BUILD SOMETHING THAT YOU KNOW ADDS TO OUR BROADER SKYLINE FROM AN ARCHITECTURAL STANDPOINT. THANK YOU FOR THAT AND THIS DOES JUST DOVETAILS ON COUNCILOR BRADEN'S QUESTION ABOUT WELL, WHAT ABOUT JUST PUTTING IN LANGUAGE THAT PROTECTS AGAINST A SUBDIVISION IT MIGHT IT MIGHT BE MORE USEFUL FOR THE CITY TO CONSIDER JUST DEFINING WHERE THESE PARCELS ARE AND WHAT WOULD BE ALLOWABLE. SO THAT'S SOMETHING TO CONSIDER MOVING FORWARD. COUNCILOR WEBER, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?  I BELIEVE COUNCILOR FITZGERALD WAS GENERAL COUNCILOR FITZGERALD I APOLOGIZE. COUNCILOR FITZGERALD IT'S ALL THAT YOU'RE ALWAYS HAPPY TO LEARN SOMETHING FROM COUNCILOR WEBER AFTERWARDS. IT IS. GREAT QUESTION. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH ALL FOR BEING AT MY QUESTIONS AROUND THIS HOUR.  SO I UNDERSTAND THIS IS FOR A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT TO OCCUR AND I STARTED THINKING ABOUT OTHER DEVELOPMENTS IN OUR OWN DISTRICT AS I'M SURE ALL OUR DISTRICT COUNCILS AND ALLIES DO AT WHAT WHAT IS THE LIMIT OR IMPACT OF THE ADJOINING PARCELS SAY THAT YOU HAVE TO YOU'RE GOING TO SUBDIVIDE IT. IS THERE A MINIMUM THAT IT HAS TO BE SUBDIVIDED TO AND HOW LARGE CAN THE YOU KNOW, PARCEL THAT IS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE SUBDIVIDED PARCEL B IN ORDER TO IS THERE ANY LIMITS AROUND THOSE TYPE OF THINGS I'M TALKING ABOUT THE KIND OF HOSPITAL WE'RE GOING TO I'M TRYING TO THINK OF LIKE IT IS NEXT TO PARKLAND.  THERE IS CONVERSATIONS ABOUT WHAT CAN HAPPEN THERE. WE KNOW IT NEEDS APPROVAL.  I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING LIKE THIS NOT BE USED AS SUBDIVIDE TO NOT HAVE TO GO THROUGH A PARKS RIGHT. BUT I ALSO DON'T WANT TO DETER DEVELOPMENT FROM OCCURRING IN OTHER PLACES AND I'M JUST WONDERING AT WHAT POINT I GUESS THE IS THERE ANY MASSING OR PARAMETER OR SCOPE OF EACH OF THOSE PARCELS IS THERE LIMITATIONS ON THAT?  IT'S AN INTERESTING QUESTION. SO THE KEARNEY HOSPITAL SITE WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE 100 FOOT RULE, RIGHT. BUT WOULDN'T BE SUBJECT THIS ORDINANCE BECAUSE IT'S NOT ALONG A PARKWAY SO IF SO IT WOULD STILL COME BEFORE THE PARKS COMMISSION FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL ANY PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ON SITE.  YOUR QUESTION THOUGH IS THEY SO DIVIDE IT SO THAT THEY CREATE A PARCEL THAT'S MAYBE ONLY 99 FEET WIDE AND THEN THAT'S THE PART 101 FEET WIDE I GUESS IS THE WAY TO LOOK AT IT. AND THEN THAT'S THE PORTION THAT HAS A REVIEW BY THE PARKS COMMISSION AND THEN THE REST OF THE SITE WOULD BE OUTSIDE OF PARKS COMMISSION REVIEW. YOU SAID IT WAY BETTER THAN YEAH I GUESS THAT'S POSSIBLE BUT AT THE SAME TIME THE PARKS DEPARTMENT STILL ENGAGES IN REVIEW OF PROJECTS AND STILL LOOKS AT OPEN SPACE IMPACTS WHETHER A PROJECT SUBJECT TO PARKS COMMISSION APPROVAL OR NOT.  SO IT BECOMES PARKS COMMISSION APPROVAL IS A STEP THAT'S REQUIRED FOR PARKS THAT ABOVE OR WITHIN 100 FEET OF A PARK LAND WHICH GENERALLY IS ABUTTING OR ACROSS THE STREET BUT BEING 101 FEET AWAY DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE DON'T PAY ATTENTION AND WE WORK CLOSELY WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT,  WITH COMMUNITY MEMBERS, WITH YOU KNOW, OTHERS IN THE CITY TO ENSURE THAT PROJECTS ARE NOT ADVERSELY IMPACTING PARK LAND. SO I GUESS SOMEBODY COULD DO THAT BUT I DON'T THINK WE WOULDN'T YOU COULD STILL WEIGH IN BUT WE DO WE LOSE SOME TEETH . WE LOSE SOME TEETH AND I GUESS IT WOULD THEN MEAN THAT OTHERS WOULD HAVE TO LEAN IN MORE TO MAKE UP FOR THOSE LOST TEETH. SO JUST AS AS THAT BEGINS TO MOVE FORWARD JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT ALL THE TOOLS WE HAVE A TOOLBOX ARE OR THAT WE'RE GOING HAVE TO EXPECT. BUT OTHER THAN THAT NO, YOU KNOW, I AM ALWAYS FOR DEVELOPMENT, FOR RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT, GOOD DEVELOPMENT AND SO I HOPE THAT THIS DOESN'T HOLD ANYTHING UP. BUT THE PROJECT SEEMS LIKE IT'S A FUNDED CENTER TO A GOOD PLACE HERE WITH A LOT OF BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN THE COUNCILOR AND THE PROPONENT. AND SO I WITHHOLD ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS. THANK YOU GUYS. THANK YOU SO MUCH.  OKAY. UM, NEXT UP IS COUNCILOR WEBER SO I READ THAT 6 MINUTES. THANK YOU.  SO I JUST I WANTED TO CLARIFY SO AS IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN THE CODE WOULD NOT ALLOW UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES THIS PROJECT TO GO CAN YOU JUST AS DESIGNED BUT BUT OKAY SO IF IT WAS LIKE A SIMILAR PROJECT I REPRESENT JAMAICA PLAIN WITH THE EMERALD NECKLACE. A SIMILAR PROJECT IS BEING PROPOSED THERE THEN THE ONLY WAY IT COULD BE BE BUILT WAS IS WITH THIS KIND OF AMENDMENT A PROJECT CAN ABSOLUTELY BE BUILT ALONG THE PARKWAYS PROVIDED THAT IT IS COMPLIANT WITH THE HEIGHT AND SETBACK RESTRICTIONS. SO THE RESTRICTIONS SET I MEAN IT VARIES ALONG THE DIFFERENT PARKWAYS BUT IT'S OFTENTIMES ABOUT 20 FEET SETBACK AND THEN THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION IS MEASURED FOR THE FIRST 100 FOOT DEPTH OF THE PARCEL AND IT SETS THE HEIGHT AT 70 FEET FOR THAT FIRST 100 FOOT DEPTH OF THE PARCEL AND THEN THERE'S ADDITIONAL HEIGHT CAN BE INTRODUCED ON THE YOU KNOW, ANY AMOUNT OF PARCEL BEYOND THAT. SO IF THERE'S IF THAT PARCEL IS 150 FEET WIDE, THOSE ADDITIONAL 50 FEET CAN HAVE MORE HEIGHT AND I THINK THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT THAT THOSE 50 FEET CAN HAVE IS GOING TO BE SUBJECT TO ZONING. I DON'T THINK THE PARKWAY ORDINANCE PROVIDES A DISTINCTION FOR THAT PIECE.  FORGIVE ME IF I'M MISSPEAKING. SO YES, YOU'RE DEFINITELY PROJECTS IN JAMAICA PLAIN ALONG PARKWAYS CAN MOVE FORWARD AND BE IN COMPLIANCE AS WE'VE SEEN BEFORE THE PARKS COMMISSION, THE PROJECTS AT 164 HUNTINGTON THE PROJECT NEXT DOOR TO THAT I'M FORGETTING THE ADDRESS.  THERE HAVE BEEN A NUMBER OF PROJECTS THAT ARE ALONG THE JAMAICA WAY THAT HAVE BEEN ALIGNED WITH THE PARKWAY ORDINANCE WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE TOWER AT THE PERKINS TOWER THAT IS NOT IN JAMAICA TOWERS.  IS THAT THAT'S THE ONE? YEAH.  SO I'M TRYING TO JUST IDENTIFY ARE THERE ANY PROJECTS IN ANY PARCELS WHERE SOMEBODY COULD DO THIS KIND OF SUBDIVISION IN IN JAMAICA PLAIN AND NOT HAVE NOT HAVE TO GET AN EXEMPTION?  SO I FEEL LIKE I CAN CHIME IN HERE.  I MEAN COUNCILOR , WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE IS TO SET THIS HIGH BAR FOR ANY PROJECT SO WE ARE ACTUALLY NOT SETTING A LEGAL PRECEDENT OF SUBDIVIDING PARCELS.  WHAT WE ARE SAYING IS THAT IF A PARCEL NEEDS TO EXCEED THE HEIGHTS THAT ARE DICTATED WITHIN THE ORDINANCE AN ACT OF CITY COUNCIL IS THE SORT OF LEVER THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT.  OKAY. AND THEN I GUESS WHEN REVIEWING THOSE, DO WE GIVE PRESIDENTIAL PRESIDENTIAL EFFECT TO A DECISION THAT WE'VE MADE IN THE PAST? HOW DOES IT PLAY OUT AT THE IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT?  OKAY. SO I THINK IN TERMS OF HOW WE WE APPROACH THIS FROM THE PLANNING SPACES, WE WORK REALLY CLOSELY WITH OUR COLLEAGUES IN PARKS AND ALSO LOOK TO WHAT LEGAL PRECEDENT HAS BEEN SET SO . I THINK YOU MIGHT HAVE JOINED ME A LITTLE BIT LATER BUT THE EXISTING BUILDING ON THIS SITE ALREADY EXCEEDS THE PARKWAY HEIGHTS AND THE EXISTING MERCANTILE BUILDING AT SOME POINT MUST HAVE RECEIVED RELIEF IN ORDER TO BUILD TO THE HEIGHT IT EXISTS AT TODAY.  SO YOU KNOW, WE ARE LOOKING TO SORT OF THOSE PRECEDENTS TO SORT OF HOW WE CONDUCT OUR WORK. WE DO REGRET THAT OUR ZONING WAS AT A SORT OF MISMATCH WITH THE EXISTING ORDINANCE BUT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT YOU KNOW, LOOKING FORWARD WE'RE HOPING TO BE MUCH MORE ALIGNED TO ENSURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE THOSE INSTANCES WHERE ZONING AND THE ACTUAL ORDINANCE ARE IN CONFLICT WITH EACH OTHER. BUT WE DO SEE THAT WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED TODAY IS SORT OF LOOKING AT A WAY IN WHICH WE'RE REALLY BUILDING IN PROTECTIONS TO ENSURE THAT, YOU KNOW, SUBDIVISION ISN'T THE SORT OF STANDARD WE LOOK AT FOR CIRCUMVENTING THE PARKS ORDINANCE AND I GUESS IF WE WERE GOING TO AMEND AN ORDINANCE TO MAKE THIS YOU KNOW ,SORT OF ELIMINATE THIS POSSIBILITY, WHERE WHERE DO YOU THINK THAT WOULD BELONG?  IS IT IN THIS SECTION THAT WE'RE AMENDING NOW OR SOMEWHERE ELSE? I'M NOT A LEGAL PERSON SO I WOULD REALLY DEFER TO LEGAL COUNCILOR ON WHAT THE RIGHT PLACES FOR A CLAUSE SUCH AS THAT. I THINK WE'RE FULLY IN FULL SUPPORT OF OUR COLLEAGUES AT PARKS TO SORT OF BE ABLE TO FIND MECHANISMS ON WHICH TO BUILD IN THOSE PROTECTIONS. BUT WE'RE NOT SURE IF THAT'S WITHIN THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ITSELF OR IN SOME OTHER SORT OF LEGAL AVENUE THAT MAY BE AVAILABLE TO THE COUNCIL . OKAY. I GUESS HAD DOES HAS THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TAKEN A POSITION ON WHETHER THEY WOULD SUPPORT THAT IN A FUTURE IF IF WE BROUGHT IT UP IN THE FUTURE SOMEWHERE ELSE OTHER THAN IN THIS PROCEEDING?  I DON'T I DON'T THINK WE'VE WE'VE TAKEN NECESSARILY A POSITION ON THAT. BUT AGAIN, AS I MENTIONED WE ARE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF WHERE OUR COLLEAGUES AT PARKS ARE AND WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE UPHOLDING THESE IMPORTANT PILLARS THAT DEFINE THE FABRIC OF OUR CITY. OKAY. AND AS A LIZA SORRY , DID I HEAR YOU CORRECTLY THAT I GUESS PARKS DOESN'T SEE THE ANYTHING ON ITS FACE THAT WOULD LEAD PARKS TO OBJECT TO THE KIND OF LANGUAGE THAT IS BEING PUSHED TO CLOSER CLOSE OUT THE LOOPHOLE.  SO IF THERE WAS ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE PROPOSED THAT RESTRICTED THE ABILITY PROPERTY OWNERS ALONG THE PARKWAYS TO SUBDIVIDE THEIR PARCELS AND TRY TO GET AROUND THE ORDINANCE, I DON'T THINK PARKS WOULD OBJECT TO THAT. WE WOULD JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S FULLY VETTED THROUGH LEGAL AND IS SOMETHING THAT THAT THAT IN AND OF ITSELF CAN BE UPHELD . AND I THINK THAT WHAT WE'VE REALLY BEEN LOOKING AT HERE IS NOT THE LANGUAGE AROUND THIS SUBDIVISION RESTRICTION BUT REALLY LOOKING AT THIS SPECIFIC PARCEL AND HOW WHAT THE PROPER EXEMPTION LANGUAGE WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH OTHER EXEMPTIONS EXIST IN THE ORDINANCE TODAY LIKE 2000 CONEMAUGH THAT'S ALSO VERY EXEMPTED FROM THIS.  OKAY. YEAH. THANK YOU CHAIR THANK YOU COUNCILOR WEBER, COUNCILOR WUERL, THANK YOU CHAIR AND THANK YOU TO THE PANEL FOR BEING HERE. I'M SORRY THAT I'M LATE. I HAVE A MY STAFF MY TEAM HAS BEEN TAKING SOME GREAT NOTES AND A LOT OF MY QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ASKED ALREADY BUT I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION THAT I DON'T KNOW IF I HEARD THE ANSWER TO YET.  CAN YOU TALK TO ME ABOUT COMMUNITY INPUT AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT? JUST KIND OF WANTED TO HEAR,  YOU KNOW, WHAT RESIDENTS HAVE BEEN SAYING WITH YOU KNOW, WHAT THE WHAT THE OUTPUT AND ENGAGEMENT HAS LOOKED LIKE AROUND THIS PROJECT.  I CAN CHIME IN FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WE LED A REALLY ROBUST ARTICLE 80 PROCESS WITH A SERIES OF PUBLIC MEETINGS IG FOLLOWED THE PROJECT ALL THE WAY TO CHIP WATER APPROVAL AND I THINK SOME OF THE FEEDBACK WE RECEIVED ALONG THE WAY WAS YOU KNOW YOU KNOW GETTING SOMETHING ON DOING SOMETHING WITH THE SITE IS DESIRABLE. IT IS FALLING INTO DISREPAIR, INTO DISREPAIR AND IT WOULD BE GREAT TO SEE SOMETHING ON THE SITE THE HOUSING PROGRAM IS SOMETHING THAT IS REALLY DESIRED BUT THERE WERE CONCERNS ABOUT THE HEIGHT AND THE ARTICULATION OF THE HEIGHT AND SPECIFICALLY I THINK OF THE FEEDBACK WE RECEIVED WAS ACTUALLY VERY MUCH ABOUT THE ORDINANCE AND THE PROTECTION OF THE ORDINANCE AND A DESIRE TO PROTECT THE ORDINANCE BY AMENDING IT AND ALLOWING FOR ADDITIONAL HEIGHT ON THE PARCEL RATHER THAN THE SUBDIVISION OF THE LAND.  SO THOSE WERE I THINK THE THE SORT OF THE MAJORITY OF THE COMMENTS WE'VE RECEIVED ALONG THE WAY AND IN TERMS OF HOW WE AS A DEPARTMENT WERE RESPONSIVE ,WE WORKED REALLY CLOSELY WITH THE TEAM TO LOOK AT THE MASSING TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE MINIMIZING IMPACTS. THERE WERE CONCERNS ABOUT WIND CONCERNS ABOUT SHADOW AND YOU KNOW, WE WORKED REALLY CLOSELY TO TRY TO ARTICULATE THE MASSING IN A WAY TO REDUCE THOSE HARMFUL IMPACTS AND GET TO SORT OF A DESIRABLE PROJECT AN OUTCOME HERE. AND THEN IN TERMS OF HEIGHT, I THINK THIS IS VERY MUCH A PRODUCT OF THE SORT OF CIRCUMSTANCE IS TO HAVE A FINANCIALLY VIABLE PROJECT RIGHT IN THIS SORT OF ECONOMY SO THOSE SORT OF PERFORM ASSOCIATED WITH THE UNIT COUNT IS VERY MUCH DICTATING THE HEIGHT AND THE AND THE ABILITY RIGHT TO UM WE LOOKED AT VERSIONS THAT WERE SORT OF SQUATTER SHORTER AND BUT TOOK UP YOU KNOW EXPRESSED THAT HEIGHT CONSISTENTLY WITHIN THE PARCEL AND THAT THAT LED TO SORT OF UNDESIRABLE OUTCOMES AS IT RELATES TO SORT OF IMPACTS ON THE ACTUAL NECKLACE ITSELF. SO AGAIN THERE WAS A LOT OF BACK AND FORTH WE DID A LOT OF ITERATION TO ARRIVE AT THE CONCEPT WE HAVE TODAY.  I THINK IT IS YOU KNOW I'M ALL FOR DEVELOPMENT A DEVELOPMENT THAT INVOLVES YOU KNOW COMMUNITY VOICE AND IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS LED A ROBUST CONVERSATION AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS WITH THE COMMUNITY SO THANK YOU. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. COUNCILOR ZERO I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR YOU. I THINK YOU HAD SAID IT BUT I'M INTERESTED IN UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE AFFORDABLE PERCENTAGE IS. YOU MENTION THAT THERE 68 AFFORDABLE UNITS THERE, 68 ON SITE AFFORDABLE UNITS RECALL AS THE DESIGNER I DON'T HAVE THE SPECIFIC AMI LEVELS IN MY HEAD BUT I THINK THAT IS THAT'S BEEN OUTLINED AND APPROVED IN THE PPA BOARD APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT. I MEAN I HAVE TO REFER BACK TO THAT.  OKAY. THANK YOU. THE REASON WHY I'M ASKING IS BECAUSE I THINK FOLKS SHOULD BE ABLE TO LIVE EVERYWHERE FOLKS THAT TYPICALLY LIVE ALONG THIS AREA ARE COME FROM A VERY HIGH SOCIOECONOMIC INCOME BRACKET. WE'RE TALKING A LOT ABOUT GREEN GENTRIFICATION AND THIS BOSTON LIKE WHAT WHAT STARTS IT IS THAT THE PARKS THAT START THE LUXURY BUILDING OR TO THE LUXURY BUILDINGS COME AND THEN THE PARKS ARE BUILT AFTERWARDS BUT I DO THINK THAT NO MATTER WHO YOU ARE OR WHAT INCOME BRACKET YOU COME FROM, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO LIVE IN THIS AREA. AND SO I'M REALLY HAPPY TO HEAR THAT THERE'S SOME AFFORDABLE UNITS IN THIS PROPOSAL. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT.  I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS BUT IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE YOU FOLKS WOULD BE ABLE TO ANSWER THEM BECAUSE IT HAS TO DO WITH THE REGULATORY AUTHORITY. IT'S VERY SPECIFIC INTO THE POTENTIAL ISSUES THAT MAY HAPPEN WITH THE WITH THIS ORDINANCE AND HOW IT RELATES TO THE ZONING COMMISSION. SO THIS INTERSECTION FROM MY NOTES PARTLY FALLS WITHIN THE 100 FEET OF THE FENCE WHICH IS WITHIN PARKS COMMISSION'S REGULATORY AUTHORITY. BUT IF SUBDIVIDED IT WOULD NO LONGER ENTIRELY FALL WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF THE COMMISSION AND SEEING THAT IT WOULD FALL OUTSIDE OF THE HUNDRED FEET RULE THE SPECIFIC INTERSECTION WOULD FALL UNDER THE ZONING CODE . SO I GUESS DO WE NEED AN ADDITIONAL COMPANION AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING CODE TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT CAN ACTUALLY BE UPHELD OR HAVE THERE ALREADY BEEN CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS? I'M PRETTY SURE AND I KNOW I COULD BE WRONG BUT I'M PRETTY SURE THAT NO, EVEN WITH THE SUBDIVISION THIS PROJECT FALLS WITHIN 100 FEET OF PARKLAND AND IT IS NOT NECESSARY ONLY CITY OWNED PARKLAND BUT IT FALLS WITHIN 100 FEET OF DCR ON PARK LAND WHICH IS ALSO SUBJECT TO THE HUNDRED FOOT RULE. IT DOES A 100 100 FOOT RULE DOESN'T CARE WHETHER IT'S OWNED BY THE STATE OR THE CITY. SO I'M PRETTY SURE THAT YES, SUBDIVISION OR NOT THIS PROJECT WILL COME BEFORE THE COMMISSION . SO THAT WAS NOT YOUR QUESTION FOR ME . YES. AND THEN ALSO I MEAN NO MATTER WHAT THE ZONING SO DOES ZONING CODE TAKE PRECEDENT AND ULTIMATELY WHAT WHAT APPROVALS ARE PROVIDED BY THE ZONING COMMISSION IS THAT ARE THEY THE ULTIMATE ARBITER IN THIS SORT OF INSTANCE OVER THE PARKS COMMISSION OR ARE THEY WEIGHT EQUALLY SO I THINK YOU CAN CHIME IN FROM FROM THE ZONING PERSPECTIVE AND I THINK YOU SHOULD CHIME IN HERE. BUT YOU KNOW WHAT THIS IS DOING IS IT'S ALLOWING FOR THE PARKS COMMISSION RIGHT TO BE ABLE TO REVIEW THIS NOW THAT THERE WOULD BE SORT OF AN ALLOWANCE FOR ADDITIONAL HEIGHT THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT THAT IS BEING PRESENTED IS WHAT WAS APPROVED AT THE BPA BOARD AND I BELIEVE WOULD BE SUBJECT TO GOING TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS WHERE THEY WOULD BE REQUESTING ADDITIONAL HEIGHT ON THE PARCEL IN BECAUSE THE EXISTING ZONING IS NOT THE HEIGHT AT WHICH THAT THE BUILDING WAS APPROVED AT. OKAY.  AND IT'S ONLY AFTER THEY RECEIVED THEIR ZONING RELIEF THAT SETS WHATEVER THEIR HEIGHT AND APPROVED HEIGHT IS THAT THEY WOULD COME BEFORE THE PARKS COMMISSION.  OKAY SO THEY WOULD GO TO THE ZBA AND THEN THE PARKS COMMISSION. CORRECT?  CORRECT. OKAY, THAT'S IT FOR ME . COUNCILOR DURKIN, DID YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS?  YES. THANK YOU SO MUCH. CHAIR. I JUST WANTED TO ADD AND NOT TO GET TOO POLITICAL ABOUT THE ZONING HERE I THINK A LOT OF THE FOLKS WHO WERE PARTY TO THIS PROJECT AND ON THE IAG AND INVOLVED WITH IT WERE ALL PART OF THE 2000 TO FUND REZONING. BUT IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE 20 TO FENWAY ZONING WAS AT A TIME WHEN WAS WRITTEN AT A TIME WHEN FENWAY PARK WAS MOVING OUT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO A VERY DIFFERENT POLITICAL CIRCUMSTANCE AND SAYS BUT IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE FACT THAT THIS IS ALONG A PARK FRONTAGE. AND I THINK WHAT AND I THINK THIS ORDINANCE HAS HELD TO THE TEST OF TIME AND I THINK PART OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE I THINK EVERYONE WE'VE HEARD FROM EVEN IF PEOPLE WANT US TO WORK ON CERTAIN ASPECTS THAT ARE NOT BEING WORKED ON PER THIS SITE SPECIFIC EXEMPTION,  EVERYONE IS VERY ALIGNED THAT THIS ORDINANCE IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT AND SHOULD BE ENSHRINED AS A LIVING DOCUMENT THAT CONTINUES TO PROTECT THE PARKS AND I JUST I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO SAY THAT OUT LOUD THAT I THINK WE'RE ALL ALIGNED THAT THIS ORDINANCE IS IMPORTANT TO THE PARK'S FUTURE AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO TO OUR CITY IN PROTECTING OUR AMAZING HISTORIC GREEN SPACES. AND I JUST WANT TO ADD I THINK WE'VE HEARD FROM A LOT OF MY COLLEAGUES VARYING DEGREES OF CONCERNS AROUND EITHER FIXING A SUBDIVISION LOOPHOLE OR WHAT IF WE DID PUT TEXT IN THIS IN THIS ORDINANCE WHAT THAT WOULD MEAN FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT ALONG THE PARK FRONTAGE AND YOU KNOW, ARE WE TYING OURSELVES TO SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T FULLY.  I AM COMMITTED I THINK IT WAS VERY IMPORTANT THAT FAMILY CIVIC ASSOCIATION WAS HERE. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.  I THINK THEIR REQUEST TO WORK ON THE QUESTION OF SUBDIVISION IS ONE THAT I WANT TO APPROACH AND I WANT TO WORK ON BUT I AM A CITY COUNCILOR FOR FIVE NEIGHBORHOODS AND NOT THE ENTIRE CITY AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WE NEED TIME AND WITH THE COUNCIL SESSION WITH LESS THAN FIVE MEETINGS TO GO, IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE PASS THIS AMENDMENT TO THE ORDINANCE PRIOR TO ZBA AND PARKS COMMISSION APPROVAL IN ORDER TO NOT CREATE A PRECEDENT THAT THOSE PROCESSES GO BEFORE AN AMENDMENT TO THE ORDINANCE. SO I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO SUPPORT MY VERSION OF THE AMENDMENT BECAUSE WHILE THERE ARE ISSUES THAT STILL NEED TO BE TALKED ABOUT AND DELVED INTO, MY INTENTION HERE IS TO NOT CREATE A HARMFUL PRECEDENT AT THIS ONE SPECIFIC SITE AND IT'S REALLY A PROCESS QUESTION MORE THAN IT IS. I THINK EVERY SINGLE PARKS ADVOCATE THAT HAS TESTIFIED OR REACHED OUT TO MY OFFICE IS ALIGNED IN WANTING THIS DOCUMENT THE PARK FRONTAGE ORDINANCE TO BE THE DOCUMENT THAT THE PARKS THAT THAT THAT ALL DEVELOPMENT ALONG THE PARK FRONTAGE NEEDS TO ABIDE BY. I THINK WE'RE ALL ALIGNED IN THAT. I THINK THERE HAS BEEN LIKE I SAID A 23 YEAR OLD DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE ZONING AND THE PARKS AND PARKWAYS ORDINANCE.  THAT'S WAY OBVIOUSLY WAY BEFORE MY TIME EVEN IN THE CITY AND I THINK I AM AN ALLY TO THE PARKS I, I CARE ABOUT OUR PARKS.  I HAVE YOU KNOW, THE EMERALD NECKLACE, THE BOSTON COMMON,  THE COMMONWEALTH MALL AGAIN AND AGAIN AND OBVIOUSLY THE BACK BAY FANS SO MUCH PARKLAND IN DISTRICT EIGHT AND I CARE I CARE SO DEEPLY THAT THIS PARKS AMENDMENT IS KEEPING ME UP AT NIGHT.  IT IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT THAT WE GET IT PASSED BEFORE ADDITIONAL APPROVALS FOR THIS PROJECT AND ACTUALLY MY GOAL WAS TO GET THIS APPROVED PRIOR TO THE BPA BOARD BUT I GOT COVERED AND IT NEEDED TO BE WITHDRAWN FROM THE COUNCIL AGENDA BECAUSE I WASN'T HERE DURING A MEETING WHEN I INITIALLY INTRODUCED IT. BUT I NEED TO SAY I'M SO HAPPY THAT HAPPENED BECAUSE BETWEEN PUTTING IT FORWARD AND THE CURRENT VERSION YOU'RE LOOKING AT TODAY WE'VE ACTUALLY CREATED A VERSION OF THE AMENDMENT THAT ONLY ALLOWS FOR THE CONFINES OF THE BUILDING THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED AND THAT WORK TO GET TO THAT POINT TOOK TIME AND ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS THAT MY COLLEAGUES FEEL LIKE NEED TO BE DEALT WITH CITYWIDE SHOULD BE DEALT WITH ON A DIFFERENT TIMELINE BECAUSE TODAY WE STAND HERE AT A PRECIPICE. WELL, THE LOT BE SUBDIVIDED TO ALLOW FOR THIS PROJECT ON THE NINTH FLOOR IN A DECISION MAKING ROOM OR WILL WE DO IT TRANSPARENTLY IN FRONT OF THE PUBLIC IN FRONT OF AND WITH US ALL AS THE COUNCIL MOVING IN THE SAME DIRECTION AND I JUST NEED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE LAST ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO THIS ORDINANCE WAS DONE UNDER VERY DIFFERENT TERMS 2000 COMMONWEALTH AV WAS A BUILDING THAT WAS CRUMBLING.  JIM RAPPAPORT WAS DEVELOPING IT . IT IS NOT A HISTORY. IT'S NOT THIS IT'S NOT THE HISTORY THAT WE WANT TO RELIVE HERE. THIS IS A PROACTIVE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW FOR A PROJECT THAT FITS THE CITY'S GOALS AND AND DOES NOT ALLOW FOR A HARMFUL PRECEDENT TO BE SET. 2000 COMMONWEALTH OF WAS A CRUMBLING BUILDING WHERE TWO DISTRICT COUNCILORS ONE OF THEM WAS FORMER MAYOR TOM MENINO WEIGHED IN ON ANOTHER DISTRICT COUNCILORS PROJECT SO YOUR PREDECESSOR COUNCILOR BREADON WAS OUT ESSENTIALLY THE THE BRIGHTON CITY COUNCILOR WAS TOLD YOU KNOW SIT DOWN AND TWO OTHER DISTRICT COUNCILORS FILED THEIR OWN VERSION OF THE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW FOR THE BK DORMITORY TO BE BUILT AFTER A CRUMBLING BUILDING WAS THERE IT'S VERY INTERESTING HISTORY AND I THINK WE SHOULD ALL LOOK INTO IT. THAT IS NOT AT ALL WHAT WE'RE DOING TODAY SO THERE IS PRECEDENT FOR THIS ORDINANCE BEING AMENDED BUT WHAT I HAVE TO SAY IS THAT THERE IS A VERSION OF THIS. THE VERSION THAT WE'RE DOING TODAY IS COMMUNITY LEADERS HAVE ASKED ME TO AMEND THIS ORDINANCE TO NOT CREATE A HARMFUL PRECEDENT AND THOSE ARE FOLKS IN THE FENWAY WHERE THIS IS LOCATED. THAT'S A THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN WHAT HAPPENED AT 2000 COMMONWEALTH HOUR BUT LEGISLATIVELY MAY LOOK THE SAME AND I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE MOVE FORWARD PRIOR TO THESE TWO OTHER APPROVALS THAT THIS PROJECT NEEDS.  AND YOU KNOW WE HEAR A LOT OF MY COLLEAGUES AND MYSELF TALKING ON THE COUNCIL FLOOR ABOUT THE NEED FOR HOUSING AND TALKING ABOUT THE NEED FOR PARKS. THEY SHOULD NOT BE PITTED AGAINST EACH OTHER.  WHAT WE'RE ATTEMPTING TO DO TODAY IS RECTIFIED A 23 YEAR OLD DISAGREEMENT THE 22 ZONING AND THE PARK FRONTAGE AND PARKING PARKWAYS ORDINANCE.  THEY SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN IN CONFLICT IN THE FIRST PLACE BUT THEY WERE AND THIS IS A GATEWAY PARCEL. THERE IS NO OTHER PARCEL IN MY DISTRICT THAT I WOULD RECOMMEND A SIMILAR ROUTE AND I, I JUST I THINK I KNOW EVERY TIME I'VE RUN INTO A COLLEAGUE I'VE SAID THIS IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT TO ME AND I WAS REALLY HEARTENED TO SEE THEM ALL SHOW UP TODAY BECAUSE THIS IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT AND IT'S INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT THAT WE UNDERSTAND THIS ORDINANCE. BUT MY CHARGE TO MY COLLEAGUE IS LET US AMEND THE ORDINANCE AND LET US AMEND IT IN A SITE SPECIFIC WAY AND IF THERE ARE ADDITIONAL CONCERNS THAT WE NEED TO CLOSE, LET'S DO THEM TOGETHER AS A CITYWIDE GROUP OF PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT THIS ISSUE BECAUSE I THINK THIS ISSUE IS SPECIFIC TO THE RUNWAY, IT'S SPECIFIC TO THIS PARCEL AND IT NEEDS TO BE DONE BEFORE THE END OF THE LEGISLATIVE TERM THIS YEAR. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH.  THANK YOU. COUNCILOR DURKAN I JUST HAVE ONE LAST QUESTION AND THEN WE CAN GO BACK TO OUR TESTIMONY WITH MORE OF A QUESTION AND THEN A COMMENT. I MEAN THIS IS THIS IS INCREDIBLE FOR THE FANS. CHARLES GATE OUT OF BROOKLINE AVENUE TO BEACON STREET COMME AB ARLINGTON STREET JAMAICA WAY OLMSTEAD BOSTON STREET TO DORCHESTER AVENUE OF COURSE LIKE I WISH WE HAD THIS AND THESE BOSTON FOR THE MARY ELLEN WALSH GREENWAY WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE TO HAVE PROTECTIONS LIKE THAT IN BOSTON WE'RE TALKING ABOUT POLICY EQUITY RIGHT? THIS IS GREAT THAT THIS IS WAS INTRODUCED AND IS MAYBE A VESTIGE OF POLITICS FROM YESTERYEAR BUT I THINK THERE IS A LARGER CONVERSATION THAT WE NEED TO HAVE ABOUT ALLOWING PROTECTIONS IN OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS.  SO I HEAR WHAT COUNCILOR DURKIN IS SAYING AND I'M GRATEFUL THAT THERE HAVE BEEN SO MANY FOLKS THAT HAVE COME OUT AND MADE THEIR VOICES BE HEARD, ESPECIALLY THE FENWAY CIVIC ASSOCIATION AND OTHERS. WE HAVE LETTERS FROM A GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS FROM THE WHAT MUDDY WATER INITIATIVE ARBORETUM PARK ALL OF THAT SO WE'LL BE SURE TO TAKE EVERYTHING INTO CONSIDERATION. I THINK THERE ARE SOME CONVERSATIONS THAT NEED TO HAPPEN. I DON'T KNOW IF A WORKING SESSION IS NECESSARILY A PART OF THAT BUT I THINK LET'S TOUCH BASE I'LL MAKE SURE TO TOUCH BASE WITH THE COUNCILOR AND OTHERS TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THIS LOOKS LIKE MOVING FORWARD, WHAT POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS IF ANY WILL BE INCLUDED. BUT I JUST WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR THEIR TIME AND THEIR THEIR ADVOCACY. WE CAN GO TO PUBLIC TESTIMONY.  I THINK NOW YOU ALL ARE ALL SET. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US THERE.  THERE WAS NOT ANOTHER PANEL CORRECT?  OKAY. WE CAN GO TO PUBLIC TESTIMONY. DO YOU HAVE ANYBODY OKAY.  NOBODY IS ON ZOOM. I DO HAVE A NAME FROM EARLIER THAT I CAN'T REALLY READ HERE.  IT BEGINS WITH A CASE YOU HAD SIGNED UP EARLIER. IT'S FROM BOSTON OR SOMETHING GROUP OKAY. WELCOME. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND AFFILIATION FOR THE RECORD YOU HAVE 2 MINUTES. YES. HI. THANK YOU. THIS ONE HERE? YEAH, HI. GOOD AFTERNOON, FRANK O'BRIEN. I'LL SPEAK VERY BRIEFLY. I THINK THERE ARE POINTS OF AGREEMENT HERE.  AN ORDINANCE IS MUCH MORE APPROPRIATE THAN A ALLOWING A SUBDIVISION AND IN THIS CASE I DO WANT TO POINT OUT A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT WERE PART OF THE DISCUSSION. THE FIRST IS THAT THE APPROACH OF ADOPTING THE SUBJECT THE ORDINANCE AS WRITTEN WOULD NOT PRECLUDE A FUTURE APPLICANT FROM SEEKING IT AS OF RIGHT SUBDIVISION. IT DOESN'T CREATE A BINDING PRECEDENT.  SO I WOULD URGE THE COUNCILORS TO INCLUDE CLOSING THE LOOPHOLE IN THIS MATTER IN THIS PARTICULAR PROPOSED ORDINANCE. THE SECOND THING IS THAT THE THE THE PROPOSED SUBSTITUTE LANGUAGE THAT RESIDENTS HAVE WORKED HARD ON AND HAVE DISCUSSED WITH COUNCILOR DURKAN AND I WOULD URGE YOU TO CONSIDER PROVIDES A PATH FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. IT DOESN'T PRECLUDE THE APPLICANT FROM SEEKING APPROVAL AS WE HEARD THIS MATTER NEEDS TO GO TO THE PARKS COMMISSION AND IN ANY EVENT AND THE PARKS COMMISSION AS I UNDERSTAND IT AND THIS IS SOMETHING PERHAPS THAT THAT LIZER CAN ANSWER IS ALLOWED TO GRANT WAIVERS FOR THE PARKWAY HEIGHT RESTRICTION . SO DO OR DO ENCOURAGE YOU TO HAVE A WORKING SESSION AND DO ENCOURAGE YOU TO CLOSE A LOOPHOLE AND AT LEAST CONSIDER IF NOT ADOPT WE DO ENCOURAGE ADOPTION OF THE SUBSTITUTE LANGUAGE. THANK YOU.  THANK YOU FRANK AND ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO TESTIFY IN THE AUDIENCE ? OKAY, GO RIGHT AHEAD. YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR AFFILIATION. HI KAREN MONIE BRADDOCK, PRESIDENT OF THE EMERALD NECKLACE CONSERVANCY.  THE EMERALD NECKLACE CONSERVANCY HAS NOT FORMALLY REVIEWED THESE DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF THE ORDINANCE AND HASN'T TAKEN A POSITION BUT I AND I'M SORRY THAT THAT HASN'T COME TO ME TO SORT OF DO THAT.  BUT WHAT WE HAVE SAID IS AND I THINK THAT THAT IS IN THE SPIRIT OF WHAT I THINK EVERYONE'S TRYING TO WORK TOWARDS HERE IS THAT WE WANTED WE WANT THIS TO NOT BE A PRECEDENT SETTING MOVE WHICH IS WHAT WE HAD SAID IN THE PREVIOUS LETTER AND AND ALSO WE ARE YOU KNOW, THE WAY THAT THE PARKWAYS ORDINANCE WORKS, THE NATURE OF THE PARKWAYS ORDINANCE DOES PROVIDE SOME SUNLIGHT PROTECTION BUT BECAUSE IT DOES ONLY APPLY TO THAT FIRST PARCEL, IT REALLY DOESN'T DO WHAT I THINK A LOT OF US ARE WANTING IT TO DO AND I APPRECIATE WHAT THE COUNCILOR IS TALKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF , YOU KNOW, THINKING ABOUT HOW THIS APPLIES CITYWIDE WE DO NOT HAVE CITYWIDE SUNSHINE PROTECTIONS FOR OUR PARKS CITYWIDE WE ONLY HAVE THEM FOR ONE PLACE. I KNOW THAT $1,000,000 HAS COME TO THE CITY TO START THAT PROCESS. I, YOU KNOW, HAVEN'T BEEN UPDATED ON IT IN A WHILE.  I'M HOPEFUL THAT IT'S MOVING FORWARD BUT IT'S BEEN QUITE SOME TIME AND YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT THAT IS IS BEING PROPOSED TO GO FORWARD.  SO THE CONSERVANCY'S POSITION, YOU KNOW AS WE HAVE STATED AS WE WOULD LIKE THERE TO BE SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T MAKE A PRECEDENT AND WE'D LIKE THERE TO BE SUNSHINE PROTECTION POLICIES FOR ALL PARKS NOT JUST THE EMERALD NECKLACE PARKS BUT FOR ALL THE PARKS IN BOSTON SO THAT EVERYONE'S ON A PLAYING FIELD BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THERE'S A COUPLE OF PARKS THAT HAVE SUNSHINE PROTECTIONS AND THEN OTHERS THAT HAVE SORT OF HALF PROTECTIONS WITH THE PARKWAYS ORDINANCE AND THEN WE HAVE PARKS ALL OVER TOWN THAT DON'T HAVE ANY OF THAT. THEY HAVE THE PARKS COMMISSION AND THEY DO HAVE TO GO TO THE PARKS COMMISSION. BUT THIS IS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE LONG TERM SUSTAINABILITY OF OUR CITY. SO I APPRECIATE THIS.  I APPRECIATE IT SOUNDS LIKE EVERYONE'S REALLY SPENDING THEIR BRAINS ON THIS BECAUSE I DO THINK IT IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT. I KNOW THE CITY IS IN THE MIDDLE OF A LOT OF CHALLENGES WHEN IT COMES TO AFFORDABILITY AND HOUSING AND BUT I ALSO THINK WE WANT TO THINK ABOUT WHAT WE'RE DOING AND HOW IT CAN BE INTERPRETED GOING FORWARD. AND I'M NOT A LAWYER SO I CANNOT OPINE ON THE LANGUAGE HERE TODAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TESTIMONY AND YOUR ADVOCACY. ANYBODY ELSE?  OKAY. IT'S CLEAR I THINK WE MIGHT BE MOVING ON THIS FOR WEDNESDAY BUT IT WILL REMAIN IN COMMITTEE. WE'LL BE SURE TO HAVE ADDITIONAL CONVERSATIONS.  SO I THINK AT THIS POINT I WILL MOVE TO CLOSE THE HEARING AND FORMALLY SAY THAT THIS HEARING ON DOCKET 1197 IS ADJOURNED. THANK YOU, EVERYBODY --------- ##VIDEO ID:_9yRJNlNLMU## Y COUNCILOR AND I AM THE CHAIR OF THE BOSTON CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION. TODAY IS OCTOBER 28TH 2024 IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER TWO OF THE ACTS OF 2023 MODIFYING CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS OF THE OPEN MEETING LAW. EVERY LIVING PUBLIC BODIES OF CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS INCLUDING THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE PUBLIC BODIES CONDUCT ITS MEETING IN A PUBLIC PLACE THAT IS OPEN AND PHYSICALLY ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC. THE CITY COUNCIL WILL BE CONDUCTING THIS HEARING VIRTUALLY BECAUSE OF THIS HEARING IS BEING RECORDED IS ALSO BEING LIVE STREAM AT BOSTON CITY COUNCIL TV AND BROADCASTED ON ITS DISNEY CHANNEL A RCN CHANNEL 82 AND FINAL CHANNEL SIX FOUR. WRITTEN COMMENTS MAY BE SENT TO THE COMMITTEE EMAIL AT C C EDUCATION BOSTON BACK UP AND WE VE MADE PART OF THE RECORD AND AVAILABLE TO ALL COUNCILORS.  PUBLIC TESTIMONY WILL BE TAKEN AT THE END OF THE HEARING. INDIVIDUAL VOTES WILL BE CALLED ON IN THE ORDER ON WHICH THEY SIGNED UP AND WILL HAVE 2 MINUTES TO TESTIFY. IF YOU ARE LOOKING TO TESTIFY PLEASE EMAIL OUR CENTRAL STAFF LIAISON RON COBB AT RON COBB BOSS THE DOCTOR OR THE LINK?  YOUR NAME WILL BE ADDED TO THE LIST. TODAY'S HEARING IS ON DOCKET NUMBER 1351. ORDER FOR A HEARING TO DISCUSS THE EXTENSION OF FREE MUSEUM PASSES EXCLUSIVELY FOR BOSTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS FAMILIES.  THIS MATTER WAS SPONSORED BY COUNCILORS MARKEY AND FLYNN AND WAS REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2020 FOR. TODAY I AM JOINED BY MY COLLEAGUES IN ORDER OF ARRIVAL COUNCIL PRESIDENT LOUIJEUNE COUNCILOR LIZ FREEDOM FROM DISTRICT NINE. ALSO ERIN MURPHY AT-LARGE AND COUNCILOR AT FLYNN DISTRICT TWO . I'D LIKE TO HAND THE FLOOR OVER NOW TO MY COLLEAGUES FOR OPENING REMARKS BEGINNING WITH THE LEAD SPONSOR AND ORIGINAL CO-SPONSOR. I THEN PROCEEDED TO BEGIN ORDER ARRIVAL FOR OUR OTHER COLLEAGUES IN THE INTEREST OF PROVIDING ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES MORE TIME FOR QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSIONS I'D LIKE TO OFFER THE LEAD SPONSOR ORIGINAL CO-SPONSOR TO SHARE OPENING REMARKS AND THEN WE'LL PROCEED ON SIDE. SO I'LL I'LL HAND IT OVER.  SO I'LL I'LL HAND IT OVER TO THE LEAD SPONSOR STARTING WITH COUNCILOR MURPHY. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. THANK YOU CHAIR AND THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR PATIENCE. AS A PROUD ARMY MOM I WENT OUT AT NINE FOR THE KICK OFF OF THE ARMY WEEK IN THE FLAG RAISING WHICH WASN'T GOING TO START TILL TEN SO WE RUSHED UP. SO THANK YOU AGAIN.  BUT SO MY OPENING STATEMENT THANK YOU FOR THIS HEARING I'VE BEEN ADVOCATING SINCE JANUARY FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE FREE MUSEUM PASSES PROGRAM TO INCLUDE ALL FAMILIES IN BOSTON . I'M EXCITED TO ANNOUNCE THAT TODAY. RIGHT. WE'RE HOLDING OUR CITY COUNCIL HEARING WHICH I FILED TO DISCUSS THIS IMPORTANT INITIATIVE.  MY GOAL ALONG WITH COUNCILOR FLYNN HAS ALWAYS BEEN TO ENSURE THAT ALL SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN IN BOSTON NOT JUST THOSE ATTENDING BYPASS HAVE ACCESS TO THESE ENRICHING CULTURAL EXPERIENCES.  AND I KNOW FROM A HEARING WE HAD A FEW MONTHS BACK AND JUST TALKING TO FAMILIES WHO HAVE TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF THIS PROGRAM THAT IT HAS BEEN A SUCCESS FOR THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN IT. TO ME THIS EXPANSION REPRESENTS A SIGNIFICANT STEP TOWARD INCLUSIVITY AND EQUITY FOR OUR CITY'S DIVERSE FAMILIES.  AS THE ONLY TEACHER ON THE BOSTON CITY COUNCIL , I BRING DECADES OF EXPERTISE AND A UNIQUE PERSPECTIVE TO THIS CONVERSATION AROUND EDUCATION AND I FIRMLY BELIEVE THAT EVERY CHILD IN OUR COMMUNITY DESERVES THE OPPORTUNITY TO ENGAGE WITH THE ARTS AND CULTURE REGARDLESS OF THE SCHOOL THEY ATTEND. IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT EVERY FAMILY IN BOSTON PARTICULARLY THOSE WHO CONTRIBUTE TO OUR CITIES THROUGH TAXES CAN BENEFIT FROM THIS PROGRAM AND I APPRECIATE IT WHEN THE MAYOR AT A PRESS CONFERENCE OR WAS QUOTED IN A NEWS ARTICLE A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO DID COMMIT TO EXPANDING THE PROGRAM STARTING IN JANUARY 2025 AND I WANT TO STRESS THE IMPORTANCE OF A ROBUST FISCAL PLAN TO SUPPORT THIS INITIATIVE THAT SHE HAS COMMITTED TO EXPANDING. SO TODAY I AM LOOKING FORWARD TO ENSURE THAT THIS EXPANSION IS BOTH FEASIBLE AND SUSTAINABLE AND THAT'S WHY I INVITED ASHLEY GLASS. CRAWFORD BURGER CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF BOSTON. JAMES WILLIAMSON, THE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF BUDGET MANAGEMENT AND STEPHEN CHAN, THE SENIOR ADVISOR FOR PARTNERSHIPS TO JOIN US AT THIS HEARING. THERE UNIQUE PERSPECTIVE AND UNDERSTANDING OF THE CITY BUDGET AND HOW THIS WILL BE FUNDED IS IMPORTANT FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS HEARING TODAY. I KNOW WE DID HAVE A HEARING A COUPLE OF MONTHS BACK WHICH WE FOCUSED JUST ON THE YOU KNOW, THE SUCCESS OF THE GRANTS THAT WERE FUNDING THE ORIGINAL PILOT AND THOSE FAMILIES WHO PARTICIPATED. SO I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO HEARING FROM THOSE FROM THE ADMINISTRATION BECAUSE THEY CAN ADDRESS KEY FINANCIAL QUESTIONS AND HELP US UNDERSTAND THE PATH FORWARD. I LOOK FORWARD TO THIS PRODUCTIVE DISCUSSION AND APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S CONTINUED SUPPORT ON THIS EXCITING INITIATIVE AS WE EXPAND IT. SO THANK YOU, CHAIR.  THANK YOU, COUNCILOR MURPHY. COUNCILOR FLYNN, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.  THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. AND THANK YOU FOR THE PANELISTS FOR BEING HERE. THANK YOU TO COUNCILOR MURPHY FOR HER LEADERSHIP ON THIS IMPORTANT ISSUE. I KNOW THAT THE CITY IS COMMITTED TO EXPANDING THE ELIGIBILITY TO ENSURE EVERY STUDENT IS ABLE TO ENJOY THESE WONDERFUL MUSEUMS THAT ARE LOCATED THROUGHOUT THE CITY.  A LOT OF CONSTITUENTS IN BOSTON RESIDENTS LOBBIED US FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME ACCORDING THE CATHEDRAL HIGH SCHOOL WHICH IS IN MY DISTRICT IN THE SOUTH END AND CRISTO REY, WHICH IS A SCHOOL IN DORCHESTER. I KNOW THERE'S OTHER OTHER SCHOOLS BUT BOTH OF THOSE SCHOOLS THEY WANTED THE OPPORTUNITY TO ATTEND THESE WONDERFUL MUSEUMS.  MOST OF THE STUDENTS I BELIEVE ARE STUDENTS OF COLOR AT THESE SCHOOLS PRIVATE SCHOOLS AND A LOT OF THEM DO RECEIVE REDUCED TUITION FOR THE SUPPORT OF SOME OF THE COMMUNITY. BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE PROVIDE THESE FIRST CLASS OPTIONS TO THESE FIRST CLASS MUSEUMS SO THAT EVERY CHILD CAN GO AND VISIT WHETHER THEY ARE CHARTER SCHOOL, METCO, PAROCHIAL SCHOOL, PRIVATE SCHOOL. AS I MENTIONED, THE MAJORITY OF THEM ARE STUDENTS OF COLOR THROUGHOUT THE CITY. I'D LIKE TO FIND OUT MOSTLY ABOUT WHAT THE FINANCIAL PLAN IS TO ENSURE THAT THIS PLAN IS ENACTED AND WHAT'S WHAT FINANCIAL SUPPORT THE CITY COUNCIL COULD PROVIDE. SO I'M ALSO LOOKING FORWARD TO HEARING FROM CITY OFFICIALS AS IT RELATES TO THE BUDGET RELATED TO APPROPRIATIONS WITH RELATES TO THE COST.  SO I AM LOOKING FORWARD TO HEARING FROM THE CITY CFO EXPLAINING THE PROCESS OF FUNDING AND EXPANDING THIS PROGRAM. I KNOW THE PROGRAM IS DOING WELL.  SO I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO THE MUSEUMS THAT ARE HERE AND CITY OFFICIALS AND HERE. I KNOW THAT I KNOW THAT'S GOING WELL.  BUT WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR IN THIS HEARING IS MOSTLY THE FINANCIAL COST AND WHO'S PAYING FOR IT AND GETTING MORE OF THE FINANCIAL DETAILS.  SO I WOULD ASK THE CITY OFFICIALS TO FOCUS THEIR COMMENTS ON ON THAT PART OF ON THAT PART OF . THANK YOU, COUNSELOR. WHEN AN ENTREPRENEUR OVER TO THE REST OF MY COLLEAGUES IN ORDER OF ARRIVAL STARTING WITH THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHN YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AND GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. I JUST WANT TO THANK THE CITY FOR THEIR WORK ON THIS PROGRAM AND FOR THE EXPANSION. YOU KNOW, AS A YOUNG KID GROWING UP IN MATTAPAN EXPOSURE AND GOING TO OUR PUBLIC SCHOOL EXPOSURE TO THESE MUSEUMS AND ASSETS HERE IN THE CITY WAS SO FOUNDATIONAL TO MY GROWTH AND MY UNDERSTANDING AND MY MY APPRECIATION FOR THE CITY OF BOSTON. I JUST WANT TO THANK THE CHILDREN'S MUSEUM, WANT TO THANK ALL OF THE FOUNDATIONS AND THE PHILANTHROPY INVOLVED IN MAKING THIS PROGRAM WHAT IT IS. I WANT TO THANK YOU CHIEF ELIOT ORTEGA. AND I LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING FROM ALL OF YOU ON THE SUCCESSES OF THIS PROGRAM LIMITATIONS AND WHERE WE GO FROM HERE. THANKS EVERYONE AND THANK YOU, MR CHAIR.  THANK YOU FROM THE PRESIDENT MYSELF. COUNCILOR BRITO, THANK YOU. HAVE THE FLOOR. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AND GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. I WILL KEEP MY COMMENTS BRIEF.  I THINK THIS IS A REALLY VALUABLE PROGRAM. I'M EXCITED TO HEAR THAT WE ARE EXPANDING IT TO OTHER SCHOOL AGED STUDENTS IN THE CITY OF BOSTON AND I REALLY IS AS CONCERNED AND CITY COUNCIL PRESIDENT LOUIJEUNE JUST MENTIONED JUST LIKE TO GET SOME BETTER INSIGHT INTO THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF HOW THE PROGRAM WORKS, THE COST OF IT AND ALSO HOW IT DOVETAILS IN WITH OUR PILOT COMMUNITY BENEFITS PROGRAM.  SO IF THERE'S ANY AS YOU KNOW THE ARTS AND CULTURE SECTOR IS ANOTHER IMPORTANT PIECE OF A NONPROFIT INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE CITY AND JUST THINKING ABOUT HOW THIS MIGHT DOVETAIL WITH OUR OUR COMMUNITY BENEFITS AND OUR PILOT PROGRAM WOULD BE WHAT'S INVESTIGATING AS WELL. SO THANK YOU. I LOOK FORWARD TO THE CONVERSATION.  THANK YOU, COUNCILOR AND THANK YOU TO ALL MY COLLEAGUES. AT THIS TIME OF NIGHT TO PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW OF THE PANELISTS THE COMMITTEE INVITED TO TESTIFY ON BEHALF OF THE ADMINISTRATION STARTING WITH ACTUALLY GROVELAND BERGER WHO IS THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF THE CITY OF BOSTON.  JAMES WILLIAMSON, DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF BUDGET MANAGEMENT.  ELLIOT ORTEGA WHO WHO'S A CHIEF OF ARTS AND CULTURE. STEPHEN CHAN WHO'S A SENIOR ADVISOR FOR PARTNERSHIPS IN THE MAYOR'S OFFICE. THE COMMITTEE ALSO INVITED TWO MEMBERS OF THE LEADERSHIP FROM THE BOSTON SHOULD AS WE SEE THEM TO JOIN THE PANEL TO SHARE THEIR PERSPECTIVES AS A PARTICIPATING INSTITUTION IN THIS PROGRAM. WE HAVE INVITED KERO SANO WHO IS THE CEO AND PRESIDENT OF THE BOSTON CHILDREN'S MUSEUM AND THEN CHARLENE MORALES SMITH WHO'S THE VICE PRESIDENT OF EXTERNAL RELATIONSHIPS AND CORPORATE DEVELOPMENT FOR THE BOSTON CHILDREN'S MUSEUM WITH THE PANELISTS WHO ARE HERE WITH US TODAY. I'D LIKE TO ASK EACH OF YOU TO JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND TITLE FOR THE RECORD AND ONCE EVERYONE HAS INTRODUCED THEMSELVES WE'LL MOVE TO OPENING REMARKS. SO WE CAN GO AHEAD, START IT AND THE PANELISTS WE HAVE HERE TODAY IF YOU CAN JUST INTRODUCE YOURSELVES.  I SEE COUNCILOR FLYNN BEFORE WE SEE HIM BUT THEN I THINK YOU'RE MUTED. COUNCILOR FLYNN.  THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. MR CHAIR, JUST ONE QUESTION. I KNOW YOU MENTIONED THE THE INVITED GUESTS INCLUDING THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER AND IN THE BUDGET AND APPROPRIATION TEAM. ARE THEY ACTUALLY ON THIS CONVERSATION? ARE THEY ON THIS MEETING?  I DO NOT SEE THEM ON A ZOOM. COUNCILOR FLYNN BUT THEY WERE INVITED AS TO OUR PROCEDURES AND RIGHT NOW WHO WE HAVE WITH US HERE TODAY AS PANELISTS WOULD PRODUCE THEMSELVES. IT MAY I MAY MAKE A SUGGESTION, MR CHAIR, AS CAN WE GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO JOIN THE MEETING? MAYBE IT'S MAYBE IT'S WE TAKE A RECESS BUT MY MY CON MY QUESTIONS ARE RELATING SPECIFICALLY TO THE FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF THE PLAN. I, I WOULD I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE APPROPRIATE CFO TO RESPOND TO SOME OF THESE QUESTIONS. SHE SHE WAS INVITED BUT ARE WE ABLE TO TAKE A RECESS TO SEE WHAT TIME THAT COMING ON AT WILL BE IN A BRIEF RECESS? WELL, ACTUALLY BEFORE THAT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I GOT HOUSEHOLD MY FIRST QUESTIONS. OKAY. AND THANK RELATED TO THAT. THANK YOU, COUNCILOR FLYNN I REQUEST THE SAME THING AND I DO WANT TO HIGHLIGHT AN UPLIFT THAT I WE FILED A HEARING ORDER SEVERAL MONTHS BACK AND WE DID HAVE THAT IN THE ARTS AND CULTURE HEARING. THAT WAS WHEN THE GRANTS WERE SEPARATED FROM THE EDUCATION AND I KNOW THE ARTS AND CULTURE TEAM WAS THERE AND WE DID HAVE A CONVERSATION. I KNOW COUNCILOR CREIGHTON AND LOUIJEUNE MENTIONED JUST SEEING THE SUCCESSES AND WE DID HAVE GOOD DATA FROM THE 17 F I SUBMITTED JUST ABOUT THE SUCCESSES OF IT BUT THIS HEARING IS DIRECTED DIRECTLY TOWARDS THE FUNDING TO ENSURE THAT THE PROMISE THAT IT'S EXPANDED IS GOING TO BE ABLE TO BE FUNDED. SO THE FOCUS IS DEFINITELY MORE ON THAT. SO I'M HOPING WE CAN GET THE PANELISTS AND I'M SORRY CHAIR BECAUSE I KNOW THIS HAS HAPPENED I THINK THE THIRD FOURTH TIME NOW THAT I HAVE FILED SOMETHING IN THE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT AND I APPRECIATE YOUR LEADERSHIP AND HAVING THIS HEARING. BUT AGAIN, THEY HAVE NOT SENT THE ADMINISTRATION WE HAVE THE HEARING ON SPECIAL ED SERVICES AND THE SPECIAL ED DIRECTOR DIDN'T COME WE HAD A HEARING ON THE RIVER ATHLETICS USE AT THE REGGIE LEWIS CENTER AND THE ATHLETIC DEPARTMENT AND BPF DIDN'T SHOW UP. SO IT'S A PATTERN THAT CONTINUES TO HAPPEN AND I APPRECIATE THE CHILDREN WHOSE NAME FOR BEING HERE.  I'M SORRY BUT I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE TAKE A BREAK AND MAKE SURE THAT THE ADMINISTRATION WHO CAN ANSWER THE IMPORTANT QUESTIONS WE HAVE ARE HERE FOR THIS HEARING OR I ASK AND THEN RESCHEDULE. THANK YOU.  THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER. OKAY. SO WHAT WE'LL DO IS WE WILL TAKE A BRIEF RECESS. I WILL CHECK IT AND THE ADMINISTRATION TO SEE IF THE PANELISTS ARE SHOWING UP THIS MORNING AND THEN I'LL COME BACK WITH AN UPDATE TO EVERYONE AND I ALSO DO WANT TO MENTION THAT WE DO HAVE A CHIEF OF THE ORTEGA ON THE LINE WHO IS REPRESENTING THE ADMINISTRATION AS WELL. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN SPEAK ABOUT FINANCE, FINANCES AND AND THAT'S UP BUT I DO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WE DO HAVE YOU WITH US TODAY. SO WE'LL WE'LL BE IN A BRIEF RECESS AND THANK YOU EVERYONE FOR YOUR PATIENCE WILL BE COMING BACK IN A FEW MINUTES .  AND WELCOME BACK EVERYONE. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR PATIENCE.  I WAS ABLE TO I'LL GIVE A BRIEF UPDATE AS TO WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN AND I'LL TURN IT OVER TO THE LEAD SPONSORS FOR ANY STATEMENTS THAT THEY MAY HAVE AS WELL.  WE DID GET A NOTIFICATION THAT BOTH THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER ACTUALLY GOLF AND BURGER AND THE DIRECTOR OF BUDGET MANAGEMENT JANEY WILLIAMSON ARE NOT GOING TO BE HERE TODAY. SO WITH THAT I HAVE SPOKEN TO THE LEAD SPONSORS. THEY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PROPER PERSONNEL IS HERE FOR THIS HEARING. SO WE ARE GOING TO RESCHEDULE THIS HEARING AT A LATER DATE. BUT I DO WANT TO MAKE SURE OUT OF THIS I WILL GIVE THE LEAD SPONSORS AN OPPORTUNITY TO SAY STATEMENT BUT I ALSO WANT TO BE RESPECTFUL OF EVERYONE'S TIME AND PEOPLE TAKING TIME OUT OF IT OUT OF THEIR SCHEDULES THIS MORNING. SO I DO WANT TO GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ANYONE FROM THE CHILDREN'S MUSEUM IF THEY WANT TO SAY YOU A SMALL STATEMENT IF YOU WISH TO CHIEF OR TAKE YOU AS WELL. AND THEN I ALSO DO WANT TO GIVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ANYONE WHO IS SIGNED UP TO PROBABLY TESTIFY TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE A PUBLIC TESTIMONY AND THEN WE WILL ADJOURN TODAY'S MEETING. SO SO SORRY FOR THAT.  BUT WITH THAT I WILL PASS IT OVER TO THE LEAD SPONSOR COUNSELOR MARTY.  THANK YOU, CHIEF SANTANA AND THANK YOU FOR EXPLAINING WHERE WE'RE GOING FORWARD ON THIS. IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THIS CONVERSATION HAS THE PROPER ADMINISTRATION HERE TO ANSWER. WE KNOW FROM THE LAST HEARING WE HELD AND WE TALKED ABOUT THE GRANTS THAT IT WAS WE SPENT OVER $1,000,000 FOR THE PILOT PROGRAM THAT WAS EXTENDED TO OUR STUDENTS. WE KNOW TO EXPAND IT TO ALL OF OUR CHILDREN IN BOSTON AT THAT PRICE WILL HAVE TO GO UP. SO IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE FIND OUT WHERE THE FUNDING IS COMING FROM.  300,000 WAS OFFERED DOLLARS IN ANOTHER YOU KNOW, REST OF IT CAME FROM NONPROFITS AND PHILANTHROPY AMAZON, HIGHLAND STREET FOUNDATION BAR FOUNDATION JIM AND CATHY STONE JUST TO NAME A FEW HAD MADE SOME SIZABLE DONATIONS AND TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS PROGRAM COULD GET OFF THE GROUND.  SO THE CONVERSATION GOING FORWARD HAS TO BE HOW IS IT FUNDED?  SO I APPRECIATE YOU RESCHEDULING AND MAKING SURE WE HAVE THE CORRECT PEOPLE IN FRONT OF US AND ALSO FOR RESPECTING THE CHILDREN EXAM. I DO JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR. HELLO, CAROLYN CHARLENE LOVE AND ALL THE GREAT WORK YOU DO SO IN NO WAY IS THIS DISRESPECT TO YOU BUT INTERGOVERNMENTAL MADE A DECISION WITHOUT COUNCILOR FLYNN AND I BEING PART OF THAT THAT THEY WOULD INCLUDE THE CHILDREN'S MUSEUM AT THIS HEARING IT WAS NOT WE DID NOT INCLUDE YOU AS PANELISTS NOT THAT WE DON'T THINK THAT YOUR INPUT OR YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF HOW THE PROGRAM HAS BEEN GOING SO FAR IS AN IMPORTANT I KNOW YOU'RE CLOSE RIGHT UP THERE WITH THE MUSEUM OF SCIENCE. YOU HAD 3817 VISITORS AND THE DATA WAS GREAT BREAKDOWN THAT I HAD REQUESTED THROUGH MY 17 NOW FOR ABOUT THE THOUSANDS OF KINDERGARTEN AND THREE FOUR OR FIVE YEAR OLDS AND OLDER PARTICIPATING IN THIS PROGRAM ALL GOOD STUFF BUT FOR US TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN CONTINUE OFFERING IT TO OUR KIDS BUT ALSO ALL OF OUR STUDENTS AND CHILDREN IN BOSTON WE DO NEED TO HEAR FROM THE CITY'S FINANCE DEPARTMENT. SO THANK YOU CHAIR. AND I LOOK FORWARD TO THE RESCHEDULED HEARING AND HOPE THAT THE ADMINISTRATION RESPECTS YOU AS THE CHAIR OF EDUCATION AND SENDS US THE PEOPLE THAT WE NEED TO GET THESE ANSWERS. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COUNSELOR MURPHY COUNCILOR FLYNN, IF YOU HAVE A PIECE STATEMENT OR COMMENT FOR THANK YOU, MR CHAIR.  I ALSO WANT TO RECOGNIZE THE DEDICATED AND PROFESSIONAL TEAM FROM THE CHILDREN'S MUSEUM WHO I'VE WORKED WITH FOR SEVEN YEARS AND I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO THEM FOR BEING INCLUSIVE AND WELCOMING TO SO MANY STUDENTS ACROSS THE CITY.  I LOVE MY WIFE AND I LOVE GOING TO THE CHILDREN'S MUSEUM AND SUPPORTING THE CHILDREN'S MUSEUM AND EVERY TIME WE'RE THERE WE'RE ALWAYS LEARNING SOMETHING.  KNOW OF THE VARIOUS PROGRAMS THE CHILDREN'S MUSEUM OFFERS TO OUR YOUNG PEOPLE AND LOOKING FORWARD TO CONTINUING TO WORK WITH WITH BOTH OF YOU CHARMAINE AND CAROL. BUT I WANT TO I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. I DON'T WANT TO APOLOGIZE FOR THE THE SCHEDULING SNAFU, BUT THANK YOU FOR EVERYTHING THAT YOU ARE DOING.  THANK YOU, COUNSELOR FLYNN BEFORE I TURN OVER TO PUBLIC TESTIMONY, IF WE HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP, I DO WANT TO GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY SO THAT WE DO HAVE HERE ANYONE OF THE TERMS ISLAMIC SCHOLAR ORTEGA IF YOU HAVE ANY BRIEF COMMENT OR STATEMENT THAT YOU WANT TO GET OUT OF THE WAY PLEASE FEEL FREE TO MEET YOURSELF AND SPEAK NOW AND THANK YOU SO MUCH AND COUNSELORS AT MAYBE I'LL JUST SAY REALLY QUICKLY THAT WE'RE EXCITED TO COME BACK ANY TIME AND TALK ABOUT THE PROGRAM WHICH WE HAVE EXTENDED THROUGH THE CALENDAR YEAR REALLY EXCITED ABOUT AND EXCITED ABOUT THE DATA THAT'S COMING IN AND WE ARE HAVING A LOT OF PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS RIGHT NOW ABOUT WHAT THAT NEXT PHASE MIGHT LOOK LIKE. AND SO YEAH, WHENEVER WE GET THIS RESCHEDULED WE'LL WE'LL BE HAPPY TO DO THAT AND THANKS TO THE TRANS MUSEUM FOR BEING HERE AND MAYBE I'LL JUST ADD THAT WE'RE ALSO GETTING SOME FEEDBACK DIRECTLY FROM FAMILIES WHO HAVE BEEN PARTICIPATING AND FEEDBACK IN MULTIPLE LANGUAGES ALL REALLY EXCITING TO READ SO JUST A LOT OF ENTHUSIASM OVER HERE AND LOOKING FORWARD TO WORKING WITH EVERYONE ON WHAT EXPANSION WILL LOOK LIKE.  THANK YOU TO AND I'LL JUST ADD FIRST OF ALL THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR KIND WORDS ABOUT THE CHILDREN'S MUSEUM AND ALSO THANK YOU TO THE CITY'S COMMITMENT TO THE ARTS IN CREATING THIS SUNDAY'S PROGRAM WHICH IS GOING TO EXPAND AS CORA MENTIONED. I JUST WANTED TO NOTE THAT THROUGH OCTOBER WE'VE ACTUALLY HAD 6429 TOTAL VISITS OF WHICH 2200 ARE BOSTON PUBLIC SCHOOL CHILDREN. THE OTHER THING THAT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE IS 41% OF THEM ARE CHILDREN WHO HAVE VISITED FOR THE VERY FIRST TIME. SO THIS GOES TO SHOW YOU THAT I CALL THIS VESSEL'S SPECIAL SAUCE OF HOW THIS IS BEING ADMINISTERED THROUGH VIPS IN THE CITY WHERE FAMILIES ARE BEING CONTACTED IN THEIR NATIVE LANGUAGE AND ALSO ARE BEING PERSONALLY INVITED ONE AT A TIME, WHICH IS SOMETHING OF COURSE MUSEUMS AREN'T ABLE TO DO. SO THIS IS WHAT'S MADE THIS SO SUCCESSFUL. AND AGAIN, I JUST WANTED TO SECOND TO OUR COUNCILOR FRIENDS TO COMMENT, YOU KNOW, THE CHILDREN'S MUSEUM IS TOTALLY FOCUSED ON INCLUSIVITY AND OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THE DOLLAR SUNDAY PROGRAM AND MANY OTHER PROGRAMS BUT THE SUNDAY PROGRAM REALLY IS A GREAT ADDITION TO THE FREE AND DISCOUNTED THAT WE ALREADY HAVE AND WE ARE REALLY COMMITTED TO CONTRIBUTING OUR OWN RESOURCES TO THE PROJECTS AND TO ENSURING THAT IT'S A SUCCESS IN ITS NEXT PHASE. SO WE ARE HAPPY TO JOIN AGAIN. IF YOU WOULD LIKE US TO JOIN JUST LET US KNOW AND I WISH YOU ALL LUCK AS YOU FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET THIS DONE FOR MORE KIDS . THANK YOU.  THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH.  I REALLY APPRECIATE IT. I JUST WANT TO ECHO MY COLLEAGUE'S COMMENTS ON HOW AMAZING IT MAY SEEM AS I'VE GONE ON A VERSIONS OF CHILD AND AS MENTIONED AT THE TOP OF THE CLIENT WHEN I WAS LAST YEAR SO AS A CANDIDATE SO YES,  APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT YOU DO ON BEHALF OF OUR CITY BEING SO AND FOR ALL OUR CHILDREN WITH THAT AND WHAT I WILL LOOK FORWARD TO. RON, DO WE HAVE ANY ANYONE WHO HAS SIGNED UP TO PUBLIC LIFE? YES, WE HAVE STEVE HOLLANDER.  OKAY. SO WE'LL TAKE PUBLIC AND MONEY RIGHT NOW AND THEN WE WILL MOVE FORWARD WITH A CHARTER JUST MEETING SO WE CAN PROMOTE STEVE AND WE'LL GET HIM WE'LL GIVE THEM 2 MINUTES.  HELLO. THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO TESTIFY. I'LL BE BRIEF.  MY NAME IS STEVE HOLLINGER, A RESIDENT OF FORT POINT AND I JUST WANTED TO BRING UP A FEW POINTS ABOUT THIS PROGRAM THAT ARE CONCERNING TO ME . IT WAS INTRODUCED AS A PILOT, NOT A PROGRAM AS COUNSELOR MURPHY SAID IT WAS ANNOUNCED AS A PILOT MEANING THAT MAYOR WU ANNOUNCED IT TO ALLOW FOR A PERIOD OF DATA COLLECTION PERIOD FOR THE MUSEUMS TO LOOK AT THEIR FINANCES AND TO COME TOGETHER TO FIGURE OUT NEXT STEPS AFTER THE PILOT ENDED. IT WASN'T ANNOUNCED AS A PROGRAM AS COUNCILMAN MURPHY SAID, AND A PILOT DESERVES SOME RESPECT IN THAT REGARD IN TERMS OF ABILITY OF MAYOR WU TO EXPAND CONTRACT OR CANCEL THE PROGRAM AND I'M A STRONG SUPPORTER OF THIS PROGRAM AND REALLY APPRECIATIVE OF THE MUSEUMS.  THE THE COUNCIL HAS EVERY RIGHT TO CHALLENGE MAYOR WU BUT THE COUNCIL SHOULD THE COUNCIL AND THE COUNCILORS SPECIFICALLY WHO KNOW NO FIRESTORM ABOUT THIS PROGRAM NOT BE EXPANDED TO ALL CHILDREN DID SO IMMEDIATELY AFTER WITHIN HOURS AS FAR AS I REMEMBER OF MAYOR WU GIVING HER STATE OF THE CITY ADDRESS AND SHE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ALLOWED AT LEAST A WEEK TO BE CELEBRATED FOR THIS PROGRAM INSTEAD OF PEOPLE WITHIN HOURS OF HER STATE OF THE CITY RUNNING TO THE PRESS AND I SEE THE EARLIEST I COULD FIND IS JANUARY 14TH, FOUR DAYS AFTER HER STATE OF THE CITY COUNCILOR FLYNN CRITICIZED THE PROGRAM IN THE PRESS AND I APPRECIATE YOU COUNCILOR FLYNN ,BUT I THINK YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN UNFAIR RUNNING TO THE PRESS IMMEDIATELY AFTER SAY THE CITY. AND FINALLY ON MY LAST POINT LAST WEEK COUNCILOR FLYNN ANNOUNCED A VERY WELL-REGARDED PROGRAM A CALL FOR A HEARING TO DISCUSS FINANCIAL LITERACY FOR BHP'S STUDENTS.  NOWHERE IN HIS HEARING ORDER DID HE SUGGEST THAT THAT PROGRAM SHOULD BE EXPANDED TO ALL STUDENTS. THERE ARE PROGRAMS FOR BHP'S STUDENTS THAT ARE IMPORTANT AND WE NEED TO SUPPORT OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND COUNCILOR FLYNN, I APPRECIATE THAT PROGRAM BUT AGAIN I'M POINTING OUT SOME HYPOCRISY AND I HOPE YOU WILL ADDRESS SOME OF THE ISSUES I'VE RAISED HERE. AGAIN, I THANK EVERYONE FOR THIS PROGRAM AND MAYOR WU FOR THIS PROGRAM AND THE MUSEUMS. THANK YOU.  THANK YOU STEVE. YOU SAID YOU TESTIFY.  DO WE HAVE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO TESTIFY?  LAST YEAR.  RIGHT. WELL WITH THAT I JUST WANT TO THANK AGAIN ALL OF OUR PANELISTS FOR BEING HERE AND OUR LEAD SPONSORS FOR INTRODUCING THIS IN MY COUNCIL COLLEAGUES FOR ALSO BEING HERE AND ALSO CENTRAL STAFF FOR ALL THE WORK THAT YOU DO TO PUT THESE HEARINGS TOGETHER. AS I MENTIONED, THIS HEARING WILL BE RESCHEDULED. I WILL WORK WITH THE LEAGUE SPONSORS AND THE ADMINISTRATION TO FIND THE TIME THAT WORKS FOR EVERYONE TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE CAN BE HERE BUT REALLY APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S PATIENCE AND EVERYONE'S WORK ON THIS.  SO WITH THAT THIS HEARING ON DOCKET NUMBER 1351 IS ADJOURNED. THANK YOU.  THANK YOU