So, thank you all again for joining us tonight. I'm Kate Rosa, a senior climate resilience project manager with the City of Boston Office of Climate Resilience. I am leading our US Army Corps Boston coastal storm risk management study on
behalf of the city. And tonight I'm very excited to walk you all through um just some quick goals for today, but you will be hearing from our US Army Corps team primarily tonight. And we have some great speakers today as part of our
team, our core project delivery team. Um so tonight some learning goals for you all to we definitely want you to be introduced to what the National Environmental Policy Act or NEPA is and how the US Army Corps is looking at the
different ways that the projects can be affected or affect the environment and our other human daily impacts. So, socioeconomic or cultural and historic uh considerations. They're going to share a lot more information about how
you can participate in the NEPA process. And then we will have some time at the end tonight to answer questions. So, I will be keeping an eye on the chat and I will be posting links as they are relevant to tonight's presentation. Um, but when it comes to questions, if you
want to jot them down in the chat, feel free. Um, but for the most part, I will then collect all of those and we can answer those at the end. Um, so I will go ahead and ask folks to stay on mute while we're going through the presentation, but you will have an
opportunity if you like to come off of mute when we get to the question and answer portion of tonight's presentation. So, with that, I want to turn it over to Oh, we didn't do introductions for the rest of the core team, but I don't want to get too far
down the road before we do that. So, why don't I pause? I'm going to pass to Jeff uh just to make sure I can introduce the Army Corps team. So, thank you Forest. >> Yeah. Hey, thanks Kate. Uh good evening everybody. Thank you for uh taking the time to join us tonight on behalf of the
Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, the Honorable Adam Tel, as well as the Chief of Engineers, Lieutenant General William Graham. uh the NAD commander, North Atlantic Division Commander, Colonel Jesse Curry, as well as my commander uh for the New
England District out of Conquered Park, Massachusetts, Colonel Justin Pavis. Thank you for taking your time tonight. My name is Jeffrey Herszog. I'm the lead planner and program manager for the US Army Corps of Engineers, New England Districts, City of Boston CSRM feasibility study. Uh and tonight I have
uh our NEPA specialist as well as our cultural resources specialist. So Todd, I'd ask you to introduce yourself. >> Hi everyone. Uh my name is Todd Randall. I'm a marine ecologist at the uh New England District and um I've been uh uh
on the this project delivery team uh involved in the uh the environmental uh aspects of of it. And uh so this is what we're going to talk a little bit about today. Um and then uh also with us today is um Ryan Constantine. Um, I'll let you
introduce yourself, Ryan. Thanks. >> Evening everyone. I'm Ryan Constantine. I am a archaeologist and historic preservation subject matter expert with the New York District and I am assisting uh the New England District on
understanding uh the cultural heritage and historic preservation concerns of this study. So excited to to walk everyone through what we've been working on. So, I'll pass it back over to you, Kate. Thank you. I'm just going to go through
a quick refresher and then pass it back over to the core team to kind of lead tonight's uh presentation and then you'll see my little floating head. You have that on your display. Go away and I'll make sure that you can see the faces of our presenters for the rest of
the presentation, too. So, a little quick refresher just to help us get familiar with the planning study. If you have not been able to join us yet at a live recording, a live Zoom presentation
or an in-person meeting, welcome. Um, but I just want to give you a little quick overview of this study. We do have a lot of information available on our web page and I will put that link in the chat. Um, but just to give you the quick overview in the city of Boston, our office of
coastal, the office of climate resilience is looking at coastal flooding impacts in three different buckets. And we're addressing all three of these buckets concurrently. So we have today's storms which is how are we managing strengthening our emergency
response to storms of today and working with our office of emergency management to help educate residents and improve our protocols and preparedness across our communities. In the second bucket,
we have preparation for today's this decade storms, which is how are we addressing those first up near-term coastal flood pathways? And we're doing this by integrating coastal resilience into ongoing capital
upgrade projects or projects that have been in the queue that are going to be constructed and doing what we can to ensure that coastal flood protection can be added to those projects as quickly as possible. So, if you're curious to learn
more about what some of those near-term or this decade projects are that we are working on, um the boston.gov/climate resilience page has a project tracker that can give you the little overview of where some of these near-term projects
are in their phasing. And for those that might be um more in a design stage, we're still actively working with those projects as part of our US Army Corps partnership to ensure that we are
designing projects efficiently for working alongside the US Army Corps CSRM system. So the third bucket is beyond 2030. How are we transforming our entire 47 milei
coastline for conditions that will arise throughout this century? And so we're looking at those midterm flood pathways 2050 and those long-term flood pathways 2070 that were identified during the climate ready Boston and neighborhood
resilience plans. And so our US Army Corps partnership fits nicely into this looking ahead bucket because as a reminder, a lot of the projects and areas that we're going to be talking about tonight as part of the study area, these are projects that are not going to
be constructed tomorrow. We do have a little bit of time before we will be putting shovels in the ground for these projects because we are doing the planning um over a longer life cycle for this work. So
to get to our US Army Corps project web page, head to boston.gov usac-study. And on this web page, you can find out about the timeline, book office hours,
you can schedule that virtual meeting, you can also fill out the feedback form and watch recordings of past events. So this is where under the the heading events and under the subheading class events, this is where tonight's recording and slides will be uploaded.
So you can check that out. And with that, I'm going to tinker with some layout settings, but I am going to pass it over to Todd. I'm gonna spotlight you for everyone. Um, take it away, Todd. >> Awesome. Thanks, Kate. Uh, can you hear
me fine? Excellent. Awesome. Um, yeah. So, so thanks everyone. Uh, we really do appreciate you, uh, taking some time tonight to, uh, um, uh, listen to our, our discussion. Um, so what I wanted to do kind of upfront, um, uh, before we kind of get into, um, a lot of the
details on the project is kind of just, uh, give you almost a why are we here. Um, uh, next slide, Kate. Uh, so we're really here, uh, in this series of meetings to talk about, um, the, uh, National Environmental Policy Act or
NEPA. Um, NEPA is a federal law that requires that uh when a um a major federal action requires a decision uh so in this case uh you know basically whether uh and and and how to uh
construct flood protection for the city of Boston um that the you know that the government lay out uh the decision tree uh or the um the process behind uh making a decision. Um and uh the
National Environmental Policy Act uh uh essentially says that when the government uh makes a decision on a major federal action, it needs to consider uh what we call the human environment. Um and so the human environment includes things such as
environmental resources um uh you know u fish and wildlife uh animals critters uh it also physical habitat air quality water quality um cultural resources uh socioeconomic resources um you know
anything that uh human beings kind of interact with is considered uh the human environment. So uh NEPA uh the law NEPA requires the government to um go through a process to demonstrate to the public uh the thoughts and the conclusions that
were made when a decision um is made. So uh it's basically a full disclosure law. Um uh so we we will step through in just a slide or two what the process is and you can see uh there are points along that kind of timeline uh or process line
of where the public can put um you know their thoughts forward and uh comments uh related to how the decision is being made. And so we're kind of at one of these points right now um or in the beginning or what we would call scoping
phase. Now I will say that um this project is is very very far along in terms of data gathering because of all the great work that the city of Boston has done uh prior to the core being involved. Uh but we still do need to go through our process. So while you know
these projects uh have been um having meetings for a period of time you know we're uh the federal government um uh is in the process now. So this is one of the things uh that we're required to do by by national law. Um next slide.
We got a little bit of lag, I guess. Um so so um uh we will basically create a document uh called a NEPA document and I'll I'll walk you through some different types and and uh inform you about what we're the path that we're on
right now. uh but essentially you know I said before that NEPA requires us to kind of lay out uh the uh the logic behind the decisions that we're making uh and considering the environment. So um the purpose of the document that we
will create uh is to uh first um kind of state the purpose and need and the problem and in this case we're talking about um you know coastal storm risk uh in the city of Boston. Um and then uh to uh kind of help that problem uh we are
developing a series of alternatives to deal with um these coastal storm uh risk. And so uh the process that NEPA um tells us to go through um is essentially to first provide baseline conditions um
within your study area. So that is essentially inventory. we need to take an inventory of anything uh in the human environment. So again, environmental resources, cultural, socioeconomic um and those are the kind of three buckets that we're going to talk to
tonight. Um we need to inventory those so we know um what is in the project area. Then we need to do an impact analysis. And by that I mean we need to look at the alternatives that we are putting forward uh and evaluating and
see how they affect those different buckets of resources. Um and so our NEPA document will document the purpose and need. It will document the alternatives that we are looking at. Uh it will uh document our inventorying, you know,
what's in the project area. Uh and then it will also document the impacts that we believe those different alternatives are going to have on the resources. And so that's probably the that that is the the major reason that we're here tonight um is to provide um a forum for public
input on we need to know we we would like to know what's important to you uh on these buckets of uh of resources. And so later on in the presentation today, we're going to step through each of those and give you examples so you have some uh some thought as to, you know,
what what we're looking for from you. Uh so you can um consider what is important to you, submit comments to us so that we're aware. So as we formulate alternatives and we look at um uh the impacts that these alternatives might have uh there are things that we can do
to um avoid minimize or mitigate for different effects that we may having but we need to know uh what's important. So while we do have a lot of data uh from previous studies, uh the state and federal agencies that we work with do
have a plethora of data, we also want to know what's important to you. Um and then um so that's um fifth bullet there, opportunities for public involvement. Uh that's where we are now. We're in scoping. We're asking the public for any kind of comments that they might have on
existing resources. So later in the presentation, um we'll show a couple different ways that you can submit comments um online through a QR code um to the website that Kate mentioned or you can email them directly to us. Um
lots of different ways uh for you to participate and and and let us know what you're thinking. Um and then finally, the NEPA document. Um uh we have to show the the federal government needs to show um the compliance with a series of
different cultural and environmental law and socioeconomic laws um that uh you know provide protection to various resources. We need to show how our project is compliant with those. So within the body of the NEPA document or the report that we produce, you'll have
the the the demonstrated compliance. Next slide, please. Um so uh our NEPA process uh um you know essentially when you're making a decision you need to see if NEPA applies. There are some strange um
situations where it doesn't. Uh most of those are congressional um authorizations that that exempt you from NEPA, but we're not uh in this project. Um it's a it's a fairly um complex project, right? 47 miles of of
shoreline. Um so uh u NEPA definitely applies. Um there's a couple paths you can take uh on the extreme left of that flowchart. Um you know you can apply a categorical exclusion. It's the box with
the CE in it. A categorical exclusion um is an activity um where uh it's very simple. Uh we have a list of these categorical exclusions that are published. Um they're usually uh undertakings that don't have significant
impacts like paving a road, mowing a field, um some land use where there's no impacts. Uh so so categorical exclusions are are things that basically have no significant impact and everyone's agreed to it. Um and uh it happens. So so this
project obviously is not a um a categorical exclusion. So the two other NEPA paths we have are um in the center there kind of the tan pathway, the environmental assessment or the EA um uh and then on the right you have the uh
the kind of bluish purple um pathway, the environmental impact statement. And so um what we're trying to get at is is the project are the is the alternatives that we're considering for this project going to have a significant impact? Um
now we generally measure significance in terms of kind of context and intensity. Um how much how long uh things of that nature um to get to significant. Um but the uh the inventorying that we do remember that was one of those steps
that I talked about previously and then the uh alternatives analysis and impact analysis that we do for the EA process and the EIS process are are very similar. Um what usually uh the big
difference is in the EIS process um you come to the conclusion that you are going to have a significant impact uh and on the back end of the process there's uh a little more um uh touch points for public involvement making sure that the public is aware that
there's going to be a significant impact um uh for the Boston CSRM study we are currently um in that kind of tan pathway way the EA environmental assessment. Um uh we we will talk a little bit about some of the resources we're seeing and
the impacts that we're seeing. Uh but at the moment we're in the EA and we're going to do a programmatic. Um and uh Jeff does a really good job uh in just a couple more slides uh to talk about why we're doing a programmatic. Um that is
essentially because of the the breadth of the project, the the the magnitude of it. um uh the funding mechanisms are not going to allow the the project to be funded all at once. It's going to have to be um uh broken up into kind of bite-size segments as he calls it um so
that they can be funded um uh and and he can talk a little bit about the risk um uh and that that we're trying to avoid from doing it that way. But just so you know, uh at the moment we're on the EA pathway. If we were to somehow um come to the conclusion that we'll see a
significant impact um we can loop back through the EIS process. Uh next slide. Um so finally um uh this is where we are kind of in that process that I walked through. We're at um uh you know in the beginning here the scoping meetings and
again we're looking for information uh from the public on any potential resources that may be of concern to you. Um we are going to do um a draft document. We're hoping to get that out um this summer in July. Um you'll be
able to review that um draft document. Uh then we'll have another series of these meetings where we kind of present the um alternatives analysis that we've done uh the plan that we've kind of put together and there'll be another opportunity for input on that. But tonight, you know, we're looking for
input on the, um, resources that may be of interest to you. Next slide. Um, and so, uh, how can I provide comments? Uh, Kate put the link in the chat. I saw that there's a QR code, um, on this slide. Um, also, uh, in the
center there is my address. You can send written, um, uh, comments to me. This, uh, presentation will be posted, so you'll have it. Um, we're asking for these kind of comments on the resources to be submitted to us by the end of
April. Uh, so we're continuing to work through our uh, impact analysis. We're going to need to know those um, upfront.r. Like I said, we have a lot of information, but we we really want to know what's important to you. Um, over on the left, there's just some examples
of possible things that that people could be concerned about. um biological resources, water, air, uh socioeconomic things, land use, historical, cultural. Um those are just kind of examples in case uh you were wondering what we're
looking for. Next slide. Um and again, there's the QR code, the links in the chat. Um so now I'm going to turn over to Jeff and he's going to talk uh next slide, Kate. Um a little bit about some of the uh the measures um that we're looking at. Uh, and then Ryan
and I'll come back and talk to you a little bit more um about those resources. Thank you. >> Hey, thanks Todd. Um, can I just get one more sound check just to make sure uh nothing happened over the last Perfect. Thanks. >> Gotcha. >> Hey, good evening again everybody.
Appreciate you attending. So, um, over the next, uh, a few minutes, we're going to have a quick, uh, math lesson, a vocabulary lesson, as well as, uh, a short discussion on, um, staircases and, and that's my way of lightly, uh, introducing this next portion, um, where
we're going to talk about, uh, why we're doing what we're doing in the information that we've received so far. So if we go to the next slide, I realize that uh Kate Rosa has shared this with many of you many times and I love it because I think it's very accurate because it's a reminder of
where we started. We started uh a decade ago, over a decade ago with the climate ready Boston initiative from the city of Boston. Uh and that progressed significantly between 2015 and 2022 with plan Charles Town, plan East Boston phase one, phase two. um downtown south
Boston. So um you know, hats off to them. In 2022, Congress um said um you know what, we're going to take Climate Ready Boston and we're going to move it to the next level. And so we were authorized a new uh feasibility investigation and partnership started in
2022 in which we were told to start with climate ready Boston and advance it to identify what federal interests lied in um implementing some of the plans uh for coastal storm risk management. We'll talk a little bit about that again in a minute. Uh but where we're at right now
is is we are uh developing that conceptual plan and we've we've got some ideas. We've got some lines on a map. Why are they just lines on a map still? uh you ask and it's a very good question. It's a fair question, but the minute I put a rendering out or a picture out and I'm not confident in that picture and I tell you this is what
it could look like, that image is burned into your mind. And so if it changes, we have issues and there's a communication chair, a barrier and a challenge. So at this point, I want your feedback on the lines on a map and the impacts of the lines on a map. And we've been having these conversations back and forth. Um
and so this is just the next evolution of that. So in July of 2026 here in just a few months we're going to release a draft NEPA document/feasibility uh draft and in that uh we're going to put uh a lot of economic and engineering information to support the lines on the
map as well as you'll see some initial renderings at that point as to what we're looking at and potential concepts as to how um these these features could be integrated into the community in the fabric of the community into the future. Uh so then we're going to want some more
comments and and uh participation from the community in order to identify really okay this is the federal investment moving forward to preliminary design. And Todd kind Todd kind of alluded to uh a programmatic NEPA document. Uh and this is probably the first time that you've heard that coming
from this audience in this group. And here's why. Uh the reality is is now that we've identified the alignments and and the interventions that we're taking and we'll talk about those in a minute. But now that we've identified that, we've also identified the fact that this is not going to be a um very cheap
undertaking. It's going to be very expensive not only for the federal government to invest, but also for the non-federal partner to invest. And so we've identified the need to u break these down into phasable, incrementable, budgetable um pieces that manage the
risk in the community um uh while still giving us time to um move along and further along some of these more complex elements of the system. So uh our most important thing is that we do not increase induce or transfer risk by
implementing some of these first initial elements. And so I do want to make sure that that is clear that we're not just going to build something because we can. We want to build something because it meets a need while it's at the same time it does not increase induce or transfer that risk to the community. So, we're
looking at by 2028 to have that first recommendation to Congress for implementation while we continue to move the other pieces forward over the next few years. Um, so it'll move through all the way up through construction operation. So, it's a spiral staircase and we're still on that spiral staircase
and we're still climbing. Um, next slide. Uh this is should be just a reminder slide but if you're first time joining us it's really important to understand that coastal storm risk it if if the if the um
problem is coastal storm risk. We have to understand what are the stressors or the drivers of that coastal storm risk. The drivers that we're talking about in this scenario are wave action and erosion. Uh and we're talking about storm surge. The stressor is sea level
change. All right. So, understanding that uh we're talking about wave action and erosion and storm surge as the drivers of the the risk, we have to understand that the risk facing Boston Harbor is not necessarily the wave action and erosion. You could argue that
in certain spots um either in the urban marsh environment or along the couple of beaches that are present um that you have some erosion concerns, but for the most part because the city is built up and the infrastructure is built right up to the edge. Your primary concern and
the primary hazard is storm surge. that wall of water approaching the coast and a lot of wave setup time associated with the winds and the northeasters and the extr tropical events. The stressor of that uh driver is sea
level change meaning that more frequent inundation uh is going to likely happen in the future as a result of storm surge and sea level change. Uh the flood pathways is just kind of our way of communicating where is the water coming from in order
for us to um decide how we want to intervene. Next slide. Excuse me. So if this is the stress and the hazard, how what are we going to do? How are we going to tackle that? And I hope that this isn't the first time
that you've heard this, but we've got a few uh uh drawers in our toolbox. The first drawer, and this is your math lesson, is structural. What does structural mean? Well, risk equals the probability times the consequence of a
hazard that occurs. So, in and of itself, the water is not um a risk. The water Excuse me. Um the water itself is not the risk. It's the coastal storm risk i.e. the
probability of the water inundating the community and what is the consequence of the water uh after it inundates the community. So if we want to reduce the risk, we have to either reduce the consequence or we have to reduce the con uh the the probability
in this first drawer. We seek to reduce the probability of inundation. We can do that by putting a wall up um putting a levey up um doing something to to stop the water from coming across the shoreline. So that's reducing the
probability. doesn't change the consequence because um the it's still there if it were to cross over. The second drawer nonstructural but still physical is important to understand. We are still building something. However,
we're not building something to reduce the probability of the water coming across the shoreline. We understand the water's coming across the shoreline. So, we have to reduce the consequence instead of the probability. And so, that's where building adaptations come in. Some examples of building
adaptations, Commonwealth Pier in South Boston, in Charletown, Spalding Rehabilitation Hospital. Um, um, another example, uh, Harbor Towers, excuse me, our friends
over in the Warf District, I've seen it every day. Uh, but Harbor Towers is another great example of an investment in building adaptations. The third drawer the core of engineers does not necessarily get um into the weeds on but we can make these recommendations and a
lot of the times they're good recommendations. These are those non-structural non-physical. These are your zoning rules. These are your permitting planning um uh rules that would uh bring people out of the flood plane um or reduce the consequence um of
of of that um hazard from occurring thereby reducing your overall risk. Next slide. So, let's just focus on that first drawer, that structural uh drawer. All right. And if we're looking here's uh some newer icons, but they're the same
tools that we've been talking about all along. All right. And this is a typical flood wall. Now, if it's a flood wall that's not a wateride, it's it's we're not talking about building in the water. This is out of the water. But if we build a flood wall and we bury it, um,
or we put a harbor walk on the other side of it, it's still a flood wall. All right? And so, uh, when we say a vertical flood wall, a typical flood wall, that means it usually has a deep tile foundation, uh, to prevent a seepage, but also to maintain, uh,
structural integrity so it doesn't turn over. If you've ever seen someone's yard and it has a beautiful yard on one side, it's slightly elevated, but the wall itself is slightly caned forward. um that's because of the foundation um wasn't set up properly and so it it
started to roll forward. We don't want that with a typical flood wall and so we have to make sure that our foundation is deep. These are great if you have real estate constraints or if you want to be able to uh adapt it to look like something else. A wateride
flood wall similar um it's intended to um stop the reduce the probability. It has a smaller real estate footprint just like a typical flood wall. However, this is something that's going to be built into the water. Why would we build it into the water? A, real estate
constraints. B, we're have uh we don't have confidence in the existing um seaw wall uh structural integrity. Uh we might not be familiar with um the amount of utilities um that are in the ground uh where the natural ground already is.
uh or we might not understand uh what kind of fill uh is already there and so to avoid any potential um hazardous toxic radioactive waste type materials um we might want to go on the water side. So uh there are some areas where
we're looking at a wateride solution. A burm a burm uh could be a a two to one uh rise type. It could be three to one. It the goal of a burm is where you have more real estate uh and you can go with
a shallow foundation. Uh go with a burm because then you can still uh uh have the same structural protection at the top from the water without the intrusiveness of all the subsurface impacts. Floodgates. Sluggates are necessary where you might have a wall or
a burm, but you have a driveway or you have a road crossing. Uh so you need to have some sort of closure structure. It might be stop logs, it might be a roller gate, might be a sliding gate um or a swing gate, raised intersection. There are certain areas where we are looking at raised roads uh in order to um
protect the area behind the road. Couple of examples, Tomahawk Drive over by the uh airport uh by um Pertio Park. If we elevate one small area, it connects encloses two flood pathway uh high
ground points and by doing so it protects the area uh behind um Tomahawk Drive. Another example um could be Moresy Boulevard by Bianculi. If you're familiar with UMass Boston and South Boston, if we slightly change the grade
of of Moresy at that intersection of Bianculi and and um Morrisy, then uh we could cut that flood pathway off and tie it into another flood protection project over by Patton's Cove uh and and uh 7 Hill. So, it's just an example of where
we're not raising the road in order to uh take the work away from DOT. What we're raising the road for is to protect the area behind. Next slide. All right, next slide. I'm going to be back in just a few minutes to talk about some socioeconomic
information. Uh but now what I wanted to do is introduce uh Ryan Constantine and have him talk to you a little bit about the archaeology and the um uh historical significance that you are already well aware of, but we have to document and we need your help uh documenting it. So
Ryan, I'll turn it over to you and let you take over. >> Thanks Jeff. So, as you all know, Boston has a depth of history and occupation within our study area. And one of the areas that we wanted to start with was
really how NEPA and something called section 106 work together. And one of the easy ways to think about it is that NEPA is the framework that looks at the whole environment. And section 106 would be the part that focuses specifically on
cultural and historic resources. So section 106 is not a separate process from NEPA. It is one of the key compliance areas evaluated within that NEPA process and Todd will speak to that
a little bit later. But agencies typically conduct the section 106 process during NEPA so that cultural resources and their impacts uh are considered before decisions are made. Next slide.
So what is section 106? It is a portion of the National Historic Preservation Act. And this is an act that requires federal agencies to take into account the effects of their undertakings on historic properties that are listed or
eligible for inclusion on something called the National Register of Historic Places. And since the core is the lead federal agency for the Boston CSRM project, this is a federal undertaking. So a federal undertaking then would be a
project, an activity or a program that is funded either partially or in whole uh by a federal agency. And to sum that up then, NEPA would provide the decision-making framework and section 106 supplies the historic
resource analysis that feeds into that framework. Next slide. So, if we're looking at protecting and preserving Boston's very rich history and heritage, what kinds of legal frameworks are we
working under? Next slide. So, outside of section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, there are two other sort of key laws that are really helping shape this investigation and analysis. And those would be the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act or
NAGPRA and then the Archaeological Resource Protection Act or ARPA. Next slide. There are also a whole other sort of realm of laws that also affect what we're investigating and how we're analyzing it. and I have them up on the
screen and they range between the abandoned ship record act, the Historic Sites Act, all the way down to the World Heritage Conservation Act. Next slide. So, when we're talking compliance with these legal frameworks, what we're
really talking about most of the time would be historic properties, and that's a capital sort of historic properties. And that would be any prehistoric or historic district, archaeological site, building, structure. And in Boston,
structures usually cover things like seaw walls, bridges, things aren't that are not necessarily a house or a business. And again, they don't necessarily have to be listed on the national historic the national register of historic places. They just have to be eligible
for it. This also includes any kinds of items, artifacts, records, and remains that might be associated with those actual sort of districts, sites, buildings, stuff like that. Next slide.
We also wanted to give you some examples. So when we're talking about historic properties that could be prehistoric archaeological sites, you know, people in Boston have wanted to live in the same places for hundreds if not thousands of years. So even though
there is a lot of urban development, as you can see on the screen, we have prehistoric, pre-cont Native American archaeological sites that are still present here in urban Boston. And so this is one of the things that we are looking for and trying to determine are
they present in the study area. What is the sensitivity for them? Things like that. Next slide. When we talk about historic sort of archaeological sites and structures, I wanted to throw up some examples. You know, we can have historic ships that
have been rehabbed and are still in use today. We have historic buildings. We have those historic districts. And then again, just because there has been a lot of modern development, those historic archaeological sites are still present
here within the study area. Next, when we're talking about sort of submerged historic properties or submerged cultural resources, we're not just talking about shipwrecks. A lot of the times that could be what we're talking about, but we could be talking
about submerged archaeological sites. A lot of areas in Boston have had intensive infill. And so areas that had been submerged where you could have a shipwreck, you could have a site that was submerged, it is now part of the
landform. So sometimes shipwrecks could show up in downtown Boston. Next, we also wanted to talk to you a little bit about some of the investigation that has occurred and some of it that is currently ongoing. So we've completed a
historical review of the study area and what is essentially a preliminary assessment of the potential for direct and indirect. When we say direct um impacts, what we're referring to most of the time would be what is in the construction
footprint. What might be impacted from building part of the project. When we're talking about those indirect impacts, we'd be talking about what kind of visual changes are going to occur w once that measure is is built. This
historic context would cover the entire study area and those assessments of impacts are more limited because it is a baseline study. We're still sort of looking at those conceptual lines on a map. So what the ongoing analysis is doing is really evaluating adverse
effects and in that would be anticipated for those historic properties and cultural resources. And we think that there is a potential to adversely affect things as we move forward. So we're going to continue to evaluate the impact of the installation of above ground
measures. Next. So, one of the key parts of our investigation and assessment is our interaction with consulting parties. And who are consulting parties? This ranges from landmark districts, the state
historic preservation officer, the Massachusetts Historic Commission down to universities, tribal partners, even you know interested community groups and community members. So everyone that participates in these meetings would be considered a
consulting party. Next. So, when we're talking about impacts to those historic properties that we went over earlier, if you want to sort of separate them into three buckets, um it's an easy way to sort of understand what we're investigating. So, when we're
talking about the archaeological resources, u you know, we're looking at what kind of ground disturbance. Has there been any disturbance to an area that has not been previously excavated? And that would include new excavation that we might be doing that would go deeper or
wider than previous excavations on the same site. What kinds of above ground construction, including construction of temporary roads and access facilities, grading or landscaping, might we be looking at as part of the project? Are we doing really any kind of modification
to the topography? When we're talking about those architectural resources like historic districts, historic buildings, we're concerned about the direct physical damage from new construction and demolition activities. Are we going to have any vibration and movement from
construction? That would be something like pile driving, foundation work, even increased truck traffic. Uh what kind of construction debris might happen during the project? Is there construction site runoff? what kind of alteration of a resource's
integrity of setting. Are we changing how someone might experience a historic building? And then usually most important to folks would be sort of those indirect visual impacts from construction of project features.
Lastly, when we're talking about those submerged cultural resources, does the project have any dredging? Are we doing onshore and underwater construction? Is there excavation for deep foundations, you know, for for driving piles? Uh are
there any temporary barriers erected for construction? That would be like quesons, coffer dams, things like that. And then sort of lastly, what kind of onshore ground disturbance? Uh is there disturbance to an area that hasn't been previously excavated?
And then due to the creation of land through those historic filling uh activities again large areas of formerly open water are now built up urban land. Next slide. So when we're trying to resolve some of
those potential adverse effects to historic properties again we sort of separated out into three categories. The first one being the development of a programmatic agreement. And you can think of a programmatic agreement as something that is like a contract between the federal government and other
parties. And its intent is to manage the effects on historic properties. And for projects as big and as wide in scope as this project, we can't always determine the effects before approval. So this
allows us to move forward with an understanding there are things that we're going to have to do moving forward. Those things move us into the second bucket. For future investigations, we use something quite often that's called a mitigation hierarchy. And that starts
with avoidance and that's really the highest priority. So that means we would potentially change the project so that a historic property is not affected at all. And this is really the preferred outcome for section 106 because it
preserves the property in place and eliminates the adverse effect. This quite often would be something like shifting project alignment uh establishing protective buffers things like that. Now if we can't avoid those
effects we move into the second priority which would be minimization. And if impacts cannot be completely avoided, um we're going to really try to reduce the severity um or the extent of the impact. And that could be reducing the footprint
of ground disturbance, using construction techniques that limit vibration, things like that. And then lastly, uh sort of the last resort would be mitigation. And that's really required when adverse effects remain after avoidance and minimization have
been considered. and it doesn't prevent the damage. Instead, it compensates for the loss of historic value. So, that could be something like an archaeological data recovery. So, a big excavation. It could be a historic American building survey. It could be
preservation easements, things like that. And then lastly, one of the key components like we talked about with the consulting parties is this consultation process. It's iterative. It's something that we're doing and it's something we're going to continue to do. So, input
from stakeholders like you guys is really important. Um, it allows us to understand what's in your neighborhood, what's important to you, what's important to your neighbors, and it allows us to develop what we like to think of as sympathetic designs. Something that if we build it in your
neighborhood, it's not going to look out of place. It's not going to look like it doesn't belong. And again this will be part of our routine coordination and consultation moving forward. Next slide. This is the last slide I promise. Um so
as we move from that feasibility into design phase which is really looking at that beyond 2020 2028 uh we're looking at doing sort of these more targeted neighborhood assessments. So as we get a better understanding of what the design and what our measures
could look like, these are some of the things that we're still considering. So would the project, you know, conflict with structural barriers in buildings that already exist? An example would be stone walls that are both historic or part of the harbor work harbor walk design.
Are there conflicts with historic buildings within that direct footprint? What kind of viewshed changes are occurring? Are there any kind of conflicts with intangibles such as, you know, recent parks? What kinds of uh,
you know, built landscapes exist, the harbor walk installations, things that are a little bit more modern but still important to your community. And then lastly, again, once we have a better idea of the designs and impacts, what kinds of, you know, conflicts are
happening with our archaeological resources? Next slide. So that sort of wraps up our discussion about historic preservation and historic properties. So I'm going to pass you over to Todd and he's going to talk a little bit more about our environmental
resources. >> Thanks Ryan. Um and uh again just to just to reiterate um the reason that we're here um is we're we're looking for information, right? Because uh our NEPA process uh tells us that we need to reach out to the public and ask them.
So, uh, on the cultural side, on these environmental resources that I'm going to talk about or, uh, some of the socioeconomic stuff that that Jeff will talk about after I'm done, uh, the final portion of the talk, we're looking for your input to see, um, if there's
anything, uh, you know, within these, uh, areas that that are of concern to you. Next slide, Kate. Um, so just really quickly, um, I wanted to kind of throw out some of the environmental resource, um, you know, what they are, what we've been looking at, um, where we
are, um, to date with some of our analysis. Like I said, um, this study is much further along than most, uh, core studies are at this point. Um, you know, usually we're starting at ground zero, but as Jeff laid out, um, and Kate pointed out earlier in the presentation,
um, the city of Boston has really advanced, um, the the commitment to flood protection, uh, over the last decade. So, we do have a lot of information, but again, this is a check-in to make sure with um, on the public side, if there's anything we haven't heard about, we really, really
want to know about it um, as we continue to formulate our alternatives. So, uh, environmental resources are are what most people think of when they when someone says environmental resources, right? Uh, the bugs and bunnies, uh, whales and snails, whatever you want to call them. Uh, critters, um, uh, such as
fish and wildlife, threatened endangered species, um, the plants, right? Upland vegetation, wetland vegetation, um, as well as the whole habitat, physical environment, so water quality, air quality, um, sediments and soil. um you
know noise um the flood planes, coastal hydraulics, all these are examples of environmental resources and uh and again I think I stated it before you know we have great partners at the city the state and the federal level that keep tabs on a lot of these but if there are
any specific resources that you are concerned about we definitely want to hear them and and kind of that's the purpose uh is to to to solicit comments from you on those. Uh, next slide. So, what I kind of wanted to do, um, so we talked about this when I talked about
NEBA and Ryan showed the, uh, the cultural resource acts. Um, there are a lot of environmental laws and regulations that this project will have to comply with. They'll be documented in our NEPA document. Um, and again, they they um, like I said, cover
environmental resources. Uh, the species, right? Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, Endangered Species Act. uh the the um physical environment, air quality, water quality. So, uh within our NEPA document, you'll see uh laid out that we comply or or how we
comply on the decisions we're making with all these laws. Next slide. Um uh I wanted to throw this out here. This has been a good one to come back to at the end when we talk about questions. But uh uh if you have been following the
study uh the Army Corps portion of it um you know that we've divided the city kind of up into five different uh the five different neighborhoods and we're looking at measures in each one of those uh those five different neighborhoods. So uh I'm going to step through a couple slides that show some of these
environmental resources um in the neighborhoods kind of what we've been doing for inventorying a bunch of the data that we've been working with. Um and then I kind of highlighted some of the spots where um we see some of the uh the impacts uh from our some of the
proposed actions. Um uh so you get a feel for uh the impact analysis that we're doing um and like I said frame uh your concern uh and anything that you want to let us know about. So um the next couple slides will be kind of by
neighborhood. So I just wanted to reiterate that that's how we kind of have the study area broken up. Next slide, Kate. Um uh so remember I said NEPA um for environmental uh the human environment,
we're looking at cultural, we're looking environmental, we're looking at socioeconomic and our kind of steps are inventorying trying to figure out what's there. So to that end, you know, we've done a lot uh well, we've utilized a lot of the existing, like I said, state um
city and federal uh databases on on these kind of resources. We've also done our own uh we've done a lot of uh uh habitat characterization. On the right, you can see um we did a sidecan sonar, which is basically a uh it allows us to
get a picture through the water of what the bottom habitat's like. Uh that picture on the right is of the little mystic channel. Um and you can see some of the the things that we found in there. There was a a barge, a sunken power boat, uh some rubble mounts. Uh
but but uh so so for our inventory, um you know, we've been doing some work to define the habitat that we see and some of the areas that we may impact. We also have associated um kind of photo documentation of uh the seaw walls and
the habitat that's on those seaw walls within the whole perimeter of the entire study area. So we have that uh we do have some actual uh biological information. Over on the on the left you can see um some video of a muscle bed
over in South Boston. So those are the kind of things the the data sets that we're collecting and we're working with. Um and then you know where we do have um uh measures that may cross uh or or on on land uh if they're up against a marsh
or running through a park or a field. You know, we've done upland uh vegetation surveys uh and some uh you know, documentation of how close to uh uh the marsh edges we may need to get with some of these. So, so just to give you an example of the inventories that
we've done uh and the kind of data that we're looking for um andor you know concerns that you may have uh towards these particular um environmental resources. This is kind of where we are. We want to know kind of what you what you're concerned about. Um next slide,
Kate. Um I these uh um so as we kind of slip into what are the environmental impacts I kind of highlighted um some of these again we're still in alternative kind of
alignment formulation. So uh we don't have hard and fast numbers on these but just to give you an example um of of where we're seeing some impacts and and how we think they're going. Um the the biggest one that we're seeing probably is uh um habitat alteration. Um and so
that would be a permanent change. Um uh and most of that occurs in areas where we have those kind of seaw walls that Jeff was talking about, a wall in front of a wall. Um so you're basically uh you're you're coming out three four feet
in front of an existing seaw wall to put another seaw wall. Uh you're going to have to drive pilings. there might be a little bit of fill. I think I have a graphic coming up that shows you that and kind of puts out some really really preliminary numbers on what we're seeing. Uh but that kind of habitat
conversion um uh is one kind of impact. Um you know there are other examples where we could create BMS or levies and you wouldn't necessarily you know you would raise the elevation of that area but you wouldn't actually change the habitat. it could still be uh you know
uh shrubs or you know like a park uh grassland ball fields uh things of that nature. So um we do have those kind of habitat alteration impacts. Um there are a lot of temporary impacts and Ryan talked a lot about um uh impacts from
construction uh elevated noise um you know increase in turbidity in the waters if you're if you're putting in a piling. Um but we do have uh a lot of um construction practices things called best management practices that we can
employ to u min avoid these impacts or minimize them. Um you know you can uh for the noise you know if you're um driving pilings you you can put in a restriction so they don't do it at night so they're not you know so it's not as
uh uh intrusive as uh pile driving 24 hours a day. um with turbidity you can work with silk curtains um you know so there there are things you can do um to to minimize impacts and and across all the environmental resources uh we are
trying to do that and we will kind of lay those out in the document um and then uh as Ryan noted with the cultural resources um we also consult with um environmental resource agencies uh we discuss the impacts uh on those critters
uh or those resources and and we can kind of come up with uh with ways to uh avoid minimizing impact impacts to environmental resources too. Uh next slide, Kate. Um so uh like I said, I wanted to show a
couple slides um just to kind of give you an uh uh an idea of how we can uh avoid minimize and impact. So this is a slide of uh endangered species. We collectively threaten an endangered species we call
protected species. Um you know there are several uh throughout the project area. Uh and as you can see clovers uh and turns do occur uh within a bunch of the neighborhoods. So we can work uh well even though they're there uh we can work
with um those kind of avoidance and minimization practices like only working or constructing. or a certain time period to avoid significant impacts um to uh to critters like that. Um the aquatic species again they're in the
water um you know we don't have a a whole host of those are um kind of fringe you know they either migrate through or they're really transient. Um but but again we do have practices um that we can do if we're putting pilings
in the water for example to uh to minimize the noise and pressure uh that's created by pile driving. So so there are definitely um you know actions that we can take to uh lower the risk of a significant impact to to different resources. Next slide.
Um I throw the next slide up. Um oh there it is. Uh so this is just uh on the left uh is some maps of uh the shellfish in the harbor. Uh and again we can avoid um impacts to some uh uh by
you know timing of our construction. Uh on the right we have a list of uh some of the common um uh important recreational and commercial fish species in the harbor. Um and so again working with the state, city and and federal
agencies. Uh we have a wealth of information on when they're there. So and then specifically some times that we might want to avoid construction periods as you can see the the the fall and the spring runs for some of the fish. Um so
these are just some of the uh you know the data sets that we're working with. But again, uh the point of this meeting is to uh not to really explain everything and and talk about impacts. We'll do that uh once the draft comes out. But right now, we want to know if
there's anything out there that is of concern to you um so that we can include that in our kind of plan formulation uh and alternatives analysis. Uh next slide, Kate. Um uh this is uh again I was talking
about those um uh habitat alteration. Uh again this is probably the the biggest kind of impact that we're seeing um uh as we kind of lean uh you know look for significant impacts. Um uh but again we have many tools um like Ryan said we
can't avoid um and we can't minimize then we may have to mitigate. And so with some areas where we need we may need some mitigation within this project. Um if you take a look at that the little graphic there of the the flood side wall um uh the little cartoon
with the stick figure on top. Uh the uh you know the the the gray blocks would be an existing seaw wall and the yellow area at the bottom would be the existing subtitle bottom. Uh, as Jeff said, you may have to, you know, you would have to, uh, essentially drive some pilings
in front of that to put a a supported wall, an engineered wall in front of that. Um, and then you may need to kind of fill. So that would be the little orange shade shaded area in there. Um, uh, to to, you know, basically get the
the engineering right for the wall. So, so that entire impact the the filling uh and then the placement of pilings is going to displace or as I said before kind of alter permanently alter some habitat. So, um again, if you look at those numbers over on the left, those
are really really preliminary. Um but remember, we're talking about 47 miles of coastline. Um and some of our alignments do uh you know even though you are going three to four feet out it doesn't seem like that much at one point in one you know kind of small area in
time but when you when you look at the entire perimeter of the coast and some of the solutions um that are possible in in the mix as alternatives um you know it does kind of add up into a a significant number of uh of bottom
alteration. U next slide. Um so so again uh just uh the listing of of what's out there for environmental resources, anything we missed, anything that you know about that you want us to know um um shoot us a comment and uh
we'd be definitely glad to uh try and incorporate that concern into our planning. So uh next slide uh Jeff's going to talk us to us about um some socioeconomic resources. then we'll give you a timeline and then um we'll have
some time for uh questions. Jeff, >> hey, thanks. And and so everyone's been so patient. I realize we are about uh 70 minutes into the presentation and really this is a lot of us giving you information to give you something that
you can um give us feedback on. So, I do recognize that and we're going to try and save a few minutes at the end for questions and comments, but really this is an opportunity to just give you an update so that you can then come back and and provide us uh additional information through the comment period.
So, let's talk about socioeconomic uh resources and I'm going to give you uh economic data in order to tell a socioeconomic story. What I mean by that, if we go to the next slide, uh we are going to um I'm going to give you
some economic information um that goes around housing, health and safety, income and employment, uh population, demographics and infrastructure and transportation which takes existing publicly available information um that we use to create social vulnerability uh
assessments for each of the five neighborhoods. So that is the ACS 5-year data as well as the um census data from the census tracks. We input that into our generation 2 coastal risk model as well as uh uh we built in our model
areas. And we then built in a storm suite of hundreds of uh both synthetic as well as historical storms that range anywhere from an everyday storm uh with a astronomical high tide at high tide uh with sea level change to a cat 5
hurricane type um a sandy type event um as well as the three norers um that that most recently occurred uh including uh Riley and Grayson in 2018. So, we feed this into the model as well as we put in the city's evacuation
planning, emergency action planning, and then we build that into the 20,000 or so assets, those buildings uh in in the study area in order to identify what are those impacts. Now, we don't just run the model one time and then and say this
is it. This is this is the result. This is a life cycle model that takes into consideration FEMA requirements to elevate uh and evacuation planning and such in order to identify. So it runs a a Monte Carlo simulation. Um so over a
50-year period of analysis every day a a storm may or may not happen of this magnitude may or may not happen and and it spits out a number at the end of value. So then we run that 100 more times. So, we get 100 iterations of a
50-year life cycle uh in which uh storms uh would likely occur at different intervals and different consequences. And that's the numbers that you're going to see here in just a minute. So, let's use economic numbers to tell a socioeconomic story. Next slide.
So, when you look at uh owner occupied versus renter occupied, the the most owner occupied uh community right now happens to be Charles Town. It's 49.21%. That's still less than 50% uh is is owner occupied. That means when a storm
hits, not only is the property owner or the home owner impacted, but the renter is impacted. That's more than just a monetary uh impact. That is a social impact on two families, not just one. So you have owner occupied and you have
renter occupied. And you see how high in downtown 76% is is renter occupied. That's a significant number. And of that you have um over 80% of the people with the exception of downtown, but over 80%
of the people have a mortgage. Surprise, I have a mortgage. You probably have a mortgage. And so that means that not only are you impacted from an economic standpoint because your your home is inundated and you're recovering from it, you still have to pay for repairs on top
of your mortgage. So that's a social impact beyond just the monetary uh uh damages that that we count and do account for. Uh when you consider all of the potential damages, all right, uh this is not trying to be hyperbolic. Uh,
some of you might actually think this is a little bit low, but the impact to residential structures or or or homes or condos, apartments, $2.1 billion over the 50-year period of analysis in
2026. And so, this is not annualized. This is not benefit to cost ratio. This is not how much it's going to cost. potential for $2.1 billion dollar to the residential uh structures and communities here in Boston. Next slide.
Life safety and health and safety. I'm not talking about life loss here. What I'm referring to is that based off of our different flood planes, 500 all the way down to the 100red-year flood plane, you have a potential of 85,000
people in your risk area. The city has a great evacuation plan. The city has great evacuation routes. The city has identified evacuation shelters, community shelters. This is a tool that helps to identify, do we need to make changes if we're not going to do any
kind of intervention. So, this is a great tool for the city to then take and and you'll notice here that between that 10 and 12 foot NAVD88 um elevation, we're not using BCB, Boston City Basic, we're using Navd88, that 10 to 12 foot uh range, that's
that's a very high uh um exposed value. But then when you look between that 13 and 14 NAVD88 foot value, that's 27,000 people who are in that population at risk. So it helps to identify what are
those minimum target elevations if we're going to do structural interventions where do we have to at least at a minimum target in order to um uh maximize that return on investment from a socioeconomic perspective. Next slide.
employment are most of you are probably not surprised um but agriculture, forestry, fishing and farming is is not a significant um um piece of the employment story here in in Boston. But you know what is those
professional services, educational services, medical services, healthcare services, STEM type services, right? And so when you consider uh where your employment consu uh characteristics are coming from that impacts people's ability to get to work. So if you do
have educational services, healthcare services and and and uh these professional type services, all right, if they can't get to work, how are they paying their rent? How are they paying their mortgage? How are they buying their groceries? So, if they can't get to work, it's it's a lot more of a
social impact than just um um oh, I'm in my house and I can't go to work because the roads are flooded. I guess I'm going to get a paid day off. Um I put on these out uh income characteristics, median incomes, and everything because it's an important
story. If these were Nebraska or Kansas somewhere in the Midwest or somewhere in the deep south, this is upper uh this is the upper class. This is probably in the top 1%, right? But the reality is is for Massachusetts in this in this area, this
region, this is middle class at best and and for some areas it might be lower middle class. So it's a important story for us to factor and consider that that just because you see a dollar value associated with an income, it does not necessarily um um portray the true
economic uh uh characteristics. Um next slide. Population. Why is population important? Because if you are going to do an intervention in an area or not do an intervention in an area, who what is the population demographic that you're
impacting? From an age perspective, if they're elderly, they it may require additional uh uh medical attention or or support to evacuate, may take additional time. Um and so it's important for us to understand what is the the population
makeup from an age perspective. Um because again if somebody is of an older population, can they really leave for three to five days? Can they really be trapped in their home for three to five days? If we choose not to do a structural intervention and do a a building adaptation, what happens when
that storm lasts 3 to 5 days? Are we asking them to stay put for 3 to 5 days? How realistic is that actually? So this is the story that we can use um these economic money uh the economic figures uh to to help tell that socioeconomic
story. Next slide. I saved this one for last intentionally because a lot of what I showed previously is directly impacted by this. All right. transportation infrastructure, $37 billion in potential future damages if we do nothing. What
that means is all those people, the 54% of East Boston that commutes via public transportation, Charles Town is 40%. But you know what? If it's 40%, that's because they're probably driving. And if they're driving, they need to be able to access the roads, bridges, tunnels in
order to get to work, uh, and in order to make a paycheck, in order to pay their mortgage, in order to buy their groceries, in order to do the repairs. Uh, so transportation and infrastructure is a very uh uh real socioeconomic
challenge uh that this project hopes to address. Utilities and equipment, $2.3 billion. Public and community buildings $112 million. Educational buildings $655 million. All right. This is this is not
hyperbole. This is not saying this is what will happen. This is what's saying based off of probability models run a 100 iterations. This is the potential damages in the future. And this is why there is certainly federal interest in this project. So overall there is a potential
over the next 50 years with no federal investment of 57 billion in 2026 value 57 billion in damages. So there is definitely federal federal interest. Now it's a matter of identifying what is the
appropriate intervention uh approach and technique in each of the individual areas because what works in one neighborhood may not be appropriate in another one. That's where you come in. That's where you you can assist us. So, next slide.
Over the next Let's go next slide. Over the next uh few months, we're going to we're going to continue to put this information together and we're going to publish a a what we call a draft release. Uh and that's going to trigger another comment period. So, over the next 30 days while we're working on on
developing our plan, your feedback can be incorporated in early. Earlier is always better. your feedback can be incorporated in what else did we miss? What else do we need to look at? And then uh we'll release the draft report and say okay here's our recommendation
at this point in time. Give us your feedback. That feedback will come from both peer review as well as a technical review as well as resource agency review and hopefully some public review and public comments. We'll take that and then over the next year uh refine our
designs and try and finalize our recommendation uh to Congress. All right. So next slide. Share your concerns. Help to answer these questions that you see on the screen. Provide comments the the emails links. You saw the QR code. In fact, we
can go to the next and and and we can um click on them in the chat, but please provide comments, provide feedback. Okay? We've had se several of these meetings over the last couple of days. The participation has not been where I'm hoping it is because I truly want to
make this a two-way conversation. I have heard a lot from the community over the last couple of years. Um, but that doesn't mean I've heard enough from the community. So, this this is that next level of communication back and forth. I realize we only have about seven minutes. Um, but but I do welcome any
comments in the chat. uh what we don't get to we will capture in the official record. Uh and that way uh you'll have an opportunity to see um get and receive this a response. So Todd, I'll turn it over to you and Kate uh and see if
there's any kind of um uh questions or comments. >> We got questions in the chat. So I want to toss first one to I believe we have one from Sarah a recommendation or a question. Are there comment email addresses? I responded in
the chat, but I will post those to our website so we'll have the email list. A question in the chat from Maria for Todd. Are there any studies concerning the estuary around the Neponet River, a state named area of critical
environmental concern? >> Yeah, we do we do have um we do have a few um u measures um down there. So we do have um uh some side scan um and then like I said those associated kind of
intertital habitat photo documentation um uh and kind of habitat uh interpretation uh within um the appendix of the report that'll come out this summer. So yeah, we we basically uh um in in areas where
we had proposed measures um we tried to collect as much data as we have. Yep. Thank you, Todd. And we had another we had a question from Sarah in the chat. Is the Office of Historic Preservation and impacted individual Boston landmark
districts participating in this process? So, for Ryan? >> Yeah, that's a great question. Thanks, Sarah. Yes. So, that's the short answer. Um, both our office of historic preservation here in the city as well as the Massachusetts Historical uh
Commission uh are involved in the study. We're consulting with them right now. Uh we're also working with the individual landmark districts as well as the state historic preservation officer. So as we've gone through the identification process, we've been consulting with them
and we will continue moving forward. >> Thank you, Ryan. Um Nicole, I see you have your hand raised. You can go ahead and come off mute and ask your question. >> Great. Thank you so much. Um I really appreciate you going through a very complex process in a very respectable
amount of time. So thank you. Um my interest is also in historic resources. So my questions are really um geared towards the section 106 part of things. So hi Ryan. Um and I am kind of new to this particular project and this
particular process. So some of my questions might be a little behind the eightball, but I'm wondering if there are interim section 106 uh documents that we can take a look at. Um if there have been like uh you know meeting notes from consulting parties meetings and
whether uh organizations can still request consulting party status. >> No, that's a great one. Um so a little bit of both um in regards to sort of the ongoing work that we're doing right um as part of our uh initial sort of
identification of what kinds of historic properties what kinds of cultural resources are in the study area um we worked with a a a consulting firm um to sort of collect that baseline study and so that has been sort of processed and
it's being finalized that is um on file with the state historic preservation office. Um when the draft report comes out in July, the um all of those findings, all of the records of
consultation that we've been doing will be a part of that draft report. So that'll be available to y'all either online or, you know, um on on the website. Um, and that would sort of sum up the investigation, what was
identified, those preliminary effects determinations, and then again that record of consultation. uh all of you know throughout the process if you or a community member, a community group, a historical society,
anyone that is a consulting party, you can request um to participate uh as a consulting party, especially as we put together this programmatic agreement. Uh we have uh a whole status of interested
parties uh that would be part of that. So you don't have to do it today. you can do it in the future or if you know of folks that learn of the study as we move forward, they can always reach out to us or to me directly and we can start sort of that consultation coordination
process. Um, and if some of the information um is sort of considered sensitive um when it comes to the identification of things like archaeological sites and stuff like that. So, some of the information is a little more um limited, but we're always
able to share um as much as we can. >> Thank you for your Nicole for your question, Nicole. Um Maria, I see your hand is raised. You can go ahead and come off mute. >> Hi, I put a question in the chat again, but I figured I'll just talk instead. Um
so um thank you Army Cor of Engineer for all your work and and the city of Boston. Um, I'm just concerned about um I know when the climate ready Boston plan was first proposed, they told us that it was mostly about the um public
lands that they had designs for and ideas for and not any of the private lands, which I know in my neighborhood, Port Nok, Jeff, you know, the um the out most of the outline of Port Norark is
private uh development. and um you know changing one area can affect another um you know specifically putting BMS along to the end can cause it to go into Port Norfolk. So is are there any plans with the Army Corps of
Engineer to look at these private sites to to work on projects that would go along with the uh climate ready Boston ideas on the on the public sites so that it would you know be more seams seamless
that's a good word right for this um any ideas on that >> so I want to uh put out a a point of clarification that it's uh the core of engineers is looking to both private and public um facilities and assets uh in
protecting those. Our primary driver for um not going around Port Norfolk uh is because of the number of structures that are already elevated um on Port Norfolk outside of the existing flood plane. Uh and and the city I believe um they can
uh further elaborate, but I believe the city is working on a pilot type program for some of the remaining um structures and assets. Uh and so to be able to um cut off that flood pathway around Tennyan uh it would require us to go uh
up through Tenian around Pine Neck or T Nepona Creek. Uh different people refer to it differently but then go all the way around Port Nokol and then um still find a place to tie in up the Naponet River. So it became a a real engineering challenge for us. uh and and with the
number of structures that are already elevated out of the flood plane um we deferred to the city in their pilot program um and then we can evaluate at a later date as to whether or not some other adaptation type features um would still be necessary. So it's not a matter
of public versus private by any means and I don't want that to be a misunderstanding or miscommunication between us and and specifically Port Norfol community. Maria, we've had some great conversations, but I'd ask if the city wants to touch on that um pilot
program real quick. I understand we're tight on time. >> Yeah. No, I know about the p the public. We're actually involved in and it's very good, but it's it's it's about the houses in the area. Um so, it's not dealing with the the businesses around the outer edge. And I know uh one of the
businesses in particular, Vanetsia, the restaurant, they were like, "What about us?" You know, so so um and you know, if you don't stop it there, it's going to come into the neighborhood anyways. But anyway, um that's the way it was explained to us, Jeff, in the beginning that that the city was only dealing with
the public. So, um anyway, um I do know about the um housing because we are involved and hopefully our house is going to be the first one that's evaluated. So, but uh Chris might want to talk about it. So, thank you, Jeff. >> Maria, great to see you. Thank you for
being here tonight. And I'll just I'll follow up uh with you to talk about sort of the full range of of tools that we're looking at. Obviously, the Army Corps is an incredibly important partner. Um and it is one of the strategies that we're looking at for implementation, one of the most important ones. Uh but we'll follow up with you about some of the
other things which uh we are also looking at. Obviously, you are quite familiar with the work focused on uh the residences of Port. So, um I'll shoot you an email after this. >> Thanks. Well, I appreciate everyone tonight. Oh,
Sarah, go ahead. >> You can come off mute. Ask your question. Sorry, my mouse wasn't taking me off mute. Thanks, Kate. I'll make this quick. Um, just a sort of more procedural question on becoming a consulting party. Um, do you become a
consulting party to the entire process or do you need to do for historic to Ryan and environmental to Todd and etc and so forth? If you could just explain that a little bit. Thank you. >> I can sort of talk to the, you know, the historic preservation, historic
properties component. Um so when we're looking at consulting parties specifically for the section 106 and sort of that NEPA side of um some of the concerns that maybe like Todd is looking at um you would be
essentially part of the conversation and the coordination of our effects determination, the investigation, things like that. So it is iterative. So it would start, you
know, whenever you'd want to be involved and it would continue pretty much throughout the process. And at any point that, you know, if you didn't want to be a consulting party or it was something that you didn't want to be a part of, it's it's easy for us to, you know, to
sort of stop that. So, I think I I hope I answered it. >> So, I I just want and and Todd, I'll let you chime in. I just want to be careful about utilizing the word consulting party um which for the NEPA process is slightly different than for the section
106 process. Um so understanding that you are from um Sarah that you are from the Harbor Front Neighborhood Association uh which is is kind of the the larger group for um um the waterfront right not to be too simple um
so we would invite your uh comments. We would invite um your your participation. Um but from a NEPA perspective the term consulting party is very specific to uh some of our our requirements. Um so uh
we definitely want you to be a part of the process and and um we we definitely want to meet with you as a key stakeholder. Um but utilizing that term consulting party is is um slightly different in the NEPA world than the
section 106 world. >> Yeah, I agree Jeff. Thanks. >> Thank you. Thank you both. That's why I asked the question. I've, you know, been involved in in different sort of situations as a consulting party and and and not. So, thank you.
>> Thank you everybody for these wonderful questions. We do have some follow-up items from the chat. Um, so I will be reaching out to folks and you will see more information posted to our project website. But I will give Jeff Herzog. Would you like some to leave our closing
word before we end for tonight have our last word. >> I just want to Yeah. I just want to thank everybody for you know it's it's 7:30 on a on a Thursday. So I'm sure there's probably other places or family that you want to be spending time with. So I truly appreciate you taking the time out of tonight to spend with us. Uh
and again this is just the next step uh in in our communication and our in our story and our walk together through this process. Um, it's exciting because in July we're going to release a draft report and that draft report is going to portray a system that we are recommending uh to Congress for
implementation over the next several years. So that's it's truly the next evolution of climate ready Boston. And and I've said it before and I'll say it again. This partnership that we have with the city of Boston and the Commonwealth is is unparallel to uh the 10 years I've been working with the US Army Corps of Engineers across the
nation including Pacific Territories. It's it's unparalleled. Uh so hats off to the partnership with the city uh and the relationship with you all as as um taking time out of your evening to join us. So thank you. Yeah. >> Thanks everybody.