Thank you. Go. Um, it's Kathleen O'Donnell um from the board of appeals. Um, opening the hearing tonight on an application regarding 23 Parkwood Drive and the nursery. Um Kathleen O'Donnell serving
as chair and um I am attending this uh meeting in person um which we are doing as a hybrid meeting. Um other members of the panel are going to be on Zoom. Um and uh we have done that as an accommodation to the applicant at their
request. Um and uh just would as I said introducing myself as the chair and sitting on the panel tonight we have Can we see Michael and Jeff?
>> What do we There we go. >> Gentlemen, you want to introduce yourselves? >> Jeffrey Mullen. >> Good evening everybody. Michael Brown. >> I'm Jeffrey Mullen. >> Thank you.
Um so tonight it's um application number uh 2884 um regarding property at 23 Parkwood. The applicants are Philip Johanning and John Row. As I said, the members of the board tonight are me um Michael Brown
and Jeff Mullen. Um and uh the application um seeks to compel enforcement uh by the building inspector of the provisions of a special permit issued to uh theer nursery on February
24 uh 2025. um with particular attention to the requirement in that permit for a um report on the drainage system uh to be submitted by July 1st of 2025.
Um and uh the applicants are alleging that there has been um flooding on their property caused um as overflow as storm water from the nursery and um have requested had requested um enforcement
by the building inspector. Um the building inspector did inspection um and did not uh take any further action and hence the appeal to the board of appeals um for hearing on this uh matter. Um we
uh said have before us um Mr. Johenning and Mr. Row um the uh assume that the people from their nursery are here and we have Mike White who's the new building inspector for the town of Milton.
Um and so with uh with the application um we received a number of documents. Um we have uh initial correspondence from um council for uh the applicants that
was uh issued in uh October 2024 pointing out that the special permit had expired. Um we have an email emails from um the they say nursery folks alleging um in providing information about the
storm flooding event on July 10th 2020 25. Um we have um messages between the Michael White um Walter White and Bill Donnelly of our department um regarding inspections and investigations at the
property. Uh we have a copy of the special permit um uh issued by the planning board and uh to uh the nursery per property located at 270 Hillside Street and 0 and 24 Forest Street. Um
Joshua and Maggie Olfield being the applicants on that permit that was issued on February 24th, 2025. Um we have a um report from the um engineering
um engineer for the applicants. Um just trying to date for that one. Um I thought I had that there. Um we also have a report filed by Del um engineering which is um dated in August
um that they Del was the applicant not the applicants but the nurseries um engineering firm um we have let's see um photographs uh showing flooding at the um uh applicant's
property um attempts to clear up the flooding at the applicant's property. Um uh we have photographs of of conditions on their premises, conditions relating to the burm and storm water um systems
installed by the nursery in accordance with the permit that was issued to them. Um we have uh two emails from um Butters um talking about the um conditions that
gave rise to the flooding on July 10th, 2025. Um pointing out um the presence of a high water table in the neighborhood and um a high groundwater um in the neighborhood as a general condition. Um as I said we have
continued um videos uh flooding pictures um of the property and also I said um conditions of the of the u installation of the storm water systems at um at the the nursery. Um, we have letters from uh
emails from Walter White reporting on his investigations of the property in um in the summer and uh emails back and forth as I said between Michael White and uh Walter White and us regarding the conditions of the property. Um that's a
rough outline of what we have been sub has been submitted to us. Um and so therefore I would ask um Mr. Joe Henning. >> Yes. Uh, I'm Phil Johann, 23 Parkwood Drive. Uh, I guess, um, uh, Madame
Chair, I'd like to make a couple of clarifications. Um, uh, your remarks. One is this is not an action involving their nursery. This action involves the,
um, acting building commissioner, who was Walter White at the time. And so we're only appealing Walter White's decision. Uh we're not uh we're not uh
involving or we did not involve um the nursery at all in our appeal. The appeal is only of the acting building commissioner's um uh decision. And the other thing I want to make clear is that
uh there was a lot of information, but this is only about um the uh the uh landscape business use bylaw. And in the bylaw, there's uh an item that says
drainage plan. And it says, "This plan shall show provisions for drainage and drainage infrastructure for the effective control of storm water and in so far as reasonably possible, its retention on site. Drainage measures
shall not cause adverse drainage impacts on neighboring properties. They shall not increase water flows onto neighboring properties nor create ponding on neighboring properties. So I I just uh not being an attorney, I just
looked up uh what does shall not mean in law and it says in law shall not means a procedure, action or element, is absolutely prohibited and mandatory not to be done. It imposes an obligation to
refrain from acting and is used to express a prohibition. And so we're talking about the acting building commissioner's uh decision uh and that's it. Um we're
not really talking about um the nursery. And the other thing I'd like to say is that um you know though uh it's interesting to see the letters from neighbors about flooding in their basement. One was built one of the homes
was built in 1860. The other was built in 1835. My home was built in 1967. We never have water in our basement ever. Ever. Um the the reason why we had water in our basement uh was that it
leaked in through the windows, not through the walls, not through the floor. And uh so we're not talking about infiltration uh in the way uh the neighbors talked about it. Um but it's really not about
water in the basement. Uh that's part of our complaint, but what we're talking about is is what I'm talking about in the bylaw. It says, "Shall not cause adverse drainage impacts, shall not
increase water flows onto neighboring properties, nor create ponding on neighboring properties." That's what this is all about. So, the parties are John and I and um the building commissioner and uh the issue is
ponding, flooding, drainage impacts. That's that's what we're talking about. So what I'm attempting to do is merely simplify what we're looking at. And the important thing about I I looked at all the photographs that were supplied by
the nursery and uh in fact they don't show water flow. They show uh on a bright sunny day uh you know a a burm and a swale. that doesn't give you any
idea of how those things act when it's actually raining. So, that's all I have to say at the moment and John will walk through um the photographs. >> I John Ro 23 Parkwood Drive. >> Do you want to give the
>> Pardon me? Do you want to give me access so I can show now? >> Sure. Just a moment. >> Okay. You should be able to share. >> So, at the bottom center of your screen,
there's a green arrow. Say share >> raise hand transcript show. >> Did you make him a panelist? >> Yep. Oh, yeah. I'm sorry. Yeah, you need to accept the request. All
>> these have your name on it. Okay. And you should see that now. And you should be able to share. >> Um, I don't see the uh thing that he showed you before where I can adjust the speed of the video.
>> Okay. >> You going to show the video first or the plot plan? >> Well, I mean, let's see if I can Okay, let me just show the plan. >> Good point. >> Um here Oh, no. They can't see anymore.
Okay. Oh, right here. Right here. Okay. So, this is the plot plan of our property. Um uh in gray is our property. Um to the left is the Kohl's. To the
right is the teenses and um uh I guess to the south if you will is uh the the property. One thing I wanted to note is between our property and teens's which is on the right there is a 10-foot lane.
Um there's a fence and you'll see it and this is important to note when you look at the pictures and the videos. Um the lane there's a a fence on our side of
the property and Stevens's fence is on the property line. we own the lane. And um so I I think it's important for you to to note that um when we look at the pictures because the water runs from um
I think it's the the northeast corner of the the property. It goes around the existing burm and then goes into our lane and then into our yard. But we do own the lane, so it comes onto
our property and then floods our yard. Um, so um, Bill, do you want to show your pictures now? >> Sure. >> Well, the first movie is what Bill wants to show. >> Okay. So, are we looking at the January
flooding first, January 2024, or did you want to go? >> Well, 2025. >> Okay. >> Well, we can look at that. I mean, it just gives you a picture that we've been flooded three times. But, but what we're challenging is the flooding in July.
[Music] >> But the result all three times is the same. where the water comes from and how it comes into it goes around the existing burm and goes into the um the lane and then under our fence into our
yard. >> So it's actually number one. Do you have >> the video? >> Yeah. >> Yes, absolutely. Pardon me a moment. Okay, this is um that's me with the water above my
ankles. Um and the the fence you can see is there and the water is well this is a picture of the burm. Um, here. Can you stop it
or? Yeah. Right here is where the water comes from the Thea property underneath the fence and then it comes into our property into the lane and it it it it
goes around the existing burm. Um it bypasses the existing burm and so you know when when they's engineer looked at the drainage system they didn't look at this. They only looked at the existing burm and they didn't take into account
all of the water from and it's in Mr. Giuliano's report. I think it's the northeast corner of their property and it comes under their fence into onto my property into the lane and then under my fence. Um, and you'll see flooding of
the entire yard and you'll see that the the flood waters are six inches deep. They come across our yard. They go into the window uh wells um the window wells of our cellar and that's how the cellar gets flooded
because it comes in through the windows. We don't have any cracks in the foundation nor do we have cracks in the floor of our uh cellar nor do I have a well nor do I have a sump pump because we've never had water. The only time we get water is when it comes across the
backyard from the the property into the wheel wells. So this is where the water comes in and then from there it goes into the the lane. Now Bill, if you can let me show the
second video which actually shows better. >> Okay. So you can >> sharing screen. >> He has to run it from his. He's the one sharing the screen. >> Yep. I'm just getting out of my share.
>> Yeah. >> So can you get your on your video? >> Oh, I can. Yeah. Um I push share. >> Yep. Go to
Pardon me just a moment. Let me see if I can assist the one I'm trying to get to. And this right here, can I just click on it? >> Where? Which one? >> Click right in there.
>> And then you'll see. Okay. >> Click on that and then it should share that. Play it. And the rest are just going to be >> Jay's Jr. is Johann. >> This is pretty much the same.
>> That doesn't seem to be sharing though. Okay, let's see. Let's back out. Just back up to the video before jump. See that was the video just in here. That way.
So, it is sharing, but it's not playing. It's not pulling up your >> Well, >> did you click play? I believe so. >> Yeah, but you're not seeing the video right now. I am, but you're not.
>> So, it's not truly sharing. So, let me see. That's >> Did you um That's not the one. We want that one. >> Okay. So, it's now we want the next one.
Is that the one you're looking for? >> Yeah. Okay. >> This is the one. >> Okay, John. >> Okay. So, um this just goes to the right facing the the property from our property. This goes to the right. Um
this is where the water comes in to our lane. The green fence is mine. I don't think Stevens's fence is 10 feet to the right of this. And so the water it goes around the existing burm um entering you
know our property from the the property um and this is where this is the water coming into onto our property. I own that lane. It does it's not owned by teenses. It's not owned by the I own that lane. And so that's why I wanted to
show you the plot plan and and to show you how the water comes from the they are property and goes around the existing burm. Um and just here it comes uh right onto my property. The stone wall is the property line between us and
there. Um and yeah, so that's the water coming from there. So I I just thought it was important for you to see that. Okay. The rest are yours. >> Okay. [Applause]
Okay. And these are the photos of So you want to go deep >> July. Yeah. >> Yeah. So this is just water coming. The the green fence is ours. The arborite hedge is on the back of our property.
Although it's really not on the back of our property. The arborites are probably uh 20 ft from the property line. Um in any event, this is the water coming under the under the fence. into our
yard. Uh, next photo. Okay. Just more of the same. I think you can see debris. The water flow is uh so heavy that, you know, there's, you know, brush and so forth, leaves that are coming with the water. This is a picture. I'm in my pool house.
Um, the water was so high it came into the pool house. I'm standing in the pool house. Next photo. Um, this is a photo taken after the flood when things are dried up. You can see the debris, brush, and so forth that
was um from the water flow >> and the direction from the grass. >> Yeah. Uh, so if you look in the right hand corner of this photo, you see a little piece of yellow. That's our pool house >> up there.
>> Right there. Yeah. So, the water comes um from the lane. Well, from there into our lane and then here. >> Okay. >> Moving along. >> Yes. Thank you. Uh just I think this is a dry photo just
more debris that you know the water um carry brush and so forth leaves. Um this is to the right of the pool house uh just to give you an indication of how deep the water is. And from here
it goes across the backyard and into um the uh window wells of the cellar. So the entire backyard is generally flooded with four to six inches of water during this flood. The same thing with
the flood in uh January of 2024. There were it happened two times January in January of 2024. The 13th of January and I think the 9th. Okay. Um just me again with water up to my
ankles. Uh yeah, just another um the pool house and you can see how deep the water is. Next next photo. Yeah. So what happened here is this picture was taken but it actually got so
high that it it went into the pool house. So I think you can see the door is open. Um, I don't know if I have a picture of inside the pool house, but um, that can show you the water in the pool house. Um, that the pool house was flooded as well.
Okay, me again. Uh this is a picture of the water coming up to the house and you can see the um the window well for the cellar and the water um fills the window well. Um
so just you know that water is 6 in deep right there. Um, next photo again, the uh the um window well of the cellar >> is half full of water
>> and that's how the water gets into the cellar. So I think we've talked about that. Um uh just a picture of the cellar and all of the junk that got ruined and we threw it up on to the pool table. you know,
just a lot of stuff that was ruined. Okay, that's Phil. I us trying to, you know, look at the place. It's a mess. >> And the important thing is the the bucket. It's that's how full it is. And I we have to carry it up.
>> So, Phil is 70 years old. I'm 65 years old. His brother is 63. and we're sucking the water out of the cellar with a wet vac and carrying it up the cellar stairs and dumping it into the driveway. Okay, >> that process took 3 hours, more than 3
hours, and then it still wasn't dry. So, just a lot of stuff ruined. This is what we're trying to protect. Next photo. >> That's it. >> I think that's all. >> That's it. Okay. Y >> All right. Um
Mr. Giuliano, do you want to uh talk about um your findings and your report? And I think the board has Mr. Giuliano's letter. >> Yes, we do. >> Okay. Um so, Mike, can you um go ahead?
Hello, Mike Juliano with Eaglebrook Engineering. Um, I have a letter that I submitted September 26th and hopefully the board has a copy of that letter. >> Yes, we do. >> Okay. So I've been working with Phil and John since 2015 regarding surface water
coming from the their property and uh we worked with um John and Phil and there and there's engineer uh Jimmy Burke to develop a solution to prevent storm water from entering their
property. And that solution was to to build an earth and burn and to send the water that's coming up the hill into the swale and down towards hillside. Um and once once once water gets into that
swale, it's fine cuz the swell and the burm are working as designed as functioned. Um we performed a site visit uh with everybody on in 2020 and uh you know the burn was constructed um the uh
erosion there was no erosion um everything was vegetated so everything looked fine. I know we had storm water that entered on the Phil and John's property in January of 2024 and then July of 2025.
And I just included just a couple pictures in my letter. The first two are the location of where water is basically bypassing the burm. So a portion of the water is bypassing the the burm and a portion of the water is going down the swell. That water that
goes in the swell is fine because it's it's contained within the the swell and and the berm is contained in the water. It's it's the water that's bypassing that uh that berm. Um, and on the last page I have a uh
sketch of the end of the BM has constructed and then where water is coming uh from the their property onto uh not only uh John and Phil's property but also Keven's property. Uh and that never happened before because I I
witnessed a few some events back in 2015 161 17 thereabouts and water never entered the Chieven's property. So there's been a drain a change in drain patents and water is just by a portion of the water is bypassing the swale and that's why water surface water is
flowing onto John and Phil's property. And the easy solution is just extend the burm because the burm is working. We just extend the burm. It'll prevent the water from entering onto Phil and John's property and it'll be sent down to hillside which is where it's current
most of the water is currently being flowed. Uh I don't think there's any um engineering study that needs to be done. I I think I I fully understand what the problem is for the you know for the last 10 years. Um it's just water bypassing
the burm and just we just need to extend the burm, prevent water from flowing um from the their property onto John and Phil's property. Um do let me just ask um do um Jeff and Michael do you have any questions for the engineer? >> I have no questions. Thank you.
>> I have a single question. Um your report Mr. Juliano mentions that, excuse me while I pull it up here. Um the it appears that the drainage patterns on the theer property have been altered to allow surface water to bypass the burm.
Um I understand and you just mentioned that the drainage patterns have changed. Are you aware of any structural or other change on the the property that that could have led to these drainage changes? No, I haven't been up to with their
property, but I know from prior to 2020, uh, water never entered the Tven's property and it flowed further um to the northwest and something changed or I'm not sure when it is, but now it's entering or some of the not all of it,
but some of the entering further southwest of the BM before it even reaches that BM. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, Mike, could you uh bring up your uh the the schematic that you put together?
>> He can't because he's not a panelist, I don't think. >> Oh, can you make him a panelist? Cuz I think that's important to show. >> Okay. >> I mean, at least for myself, I'm looking at it here on my screen. >> Can you see? Um, >> looks like it's about to start.
>> Yeah. >> Can you see? Is that the the plan you're talking about? >> Yeah. And if you look at if and maybe Mike, you can talk to this a little bit better than I can. >> So, a lot of the pictures we we see of the swale that's in the burm that's over
here that extends this way and hillsides over um over to the left and this is working fine. You know, it's containing water. But what's happening is water's coming down. And it used to come down generally in this fashion right here. But for some reason it's coming over
here before the burm even starts. And so water some of the water's going down the swale. But some of the water is actually coming in through here. And this is that uh the photographs uh that show the wood fence and the chain link fence that's over in this corner over in here. So some of the water's coming here and then
flowing onto John and Bill's property. And then some of the water is obviously flowing down the burm. So this is what the where the problem is. And just by just extending the burm further to the southeast, you know, that will solve the problem.
I think it's, you know, fairly simple. >> So, just to reiterate, uh, Mike, you think just by extending the burum, a very, very simple, um, exercise can make everybody happy. >> Yeah. Yeah, cuz we looked at this with
Bay's engineer for the last, you know, 5 years and and it's obviously surface water and by extending the burm, it will force water to go along the swale towards hillside and and the reason for water flowing onto John and Phil's property is because
it's bypassing the burm. So I think it's just a matter of extending the burn. Does anybody have any questions for Mr. Giuliani? I had a question. I was wondering on these events. I'm new. I'm only been here 2 and 1/2 months, so I don't really
know the the whole history of what's been going on, but I got a pretty good idea now. I'm curious on the dates that the these events happened. Do we know how much rain fell? I know recently
Milton's had some serious storms that the expressway drainage was overwhelmed and they had to shut the expressway down. And I'm just curious if we know the amounts or ballpark amount of rain that fell on those incidents.
>> I think I can answer on on uh July. Is it the 15th Phil or the 13th? The 10th of July. >> Um several inches of rain fell in a few hours. Okay. Every, you know, if you if
you listen to the weather people, you know, every year we have a hundredyear storm. You know, this is our reality. Climate change and the drainage should be sufficient enough to handle 100year
storms that happen every year. Now, you know, it and like Phil pointed out, the bylaw says, you know, you cannot, you know, flood the abuing properties, and that's what the bylaw says. I didn't write the
bylaw. Um, and I I don't think when this has happened three times within a 12-month period, these aren't hundred-year storms. They're not. and and you know our engineer that we
paid for and we paid for and Mr. Mullen, you're well aware of how many times we paid Mr. Giuliano for other abuing properties when uh they wanted to build a house and so forth and Mr. Giuliano
reviewed their uh drainage plan and um the the cards house in particular um Mr. Giuliano. We paid for him to look at the drainage plan and uh the builder
of the card's house agreed to make Mr. Giuliano's changes and we it did not get any flooding. And I I just want to point out, Mr. Mullen, you know this. We have paid for this and it's not our responsibility to pay
for drainage studies for neighbors properties especially neighbors that one was a you know once a commercial establishment and the other one was uh developing a house on a vacant lot. So just I just wanted to say that.
>> Any other questions of Mr. Gilliano? Okay. >> Is there anything else that you are going to be presenting to us? >> Phil, did you want to >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Excuse me. I'm not mad chair. >> Yes.
>> I'm also like I was the acting building commissioner. >> Oh yes. >> And as Mr. Johanning pointed out, they're simply challenging my decision. >> I understand that, Mr. White, >> but they haven't presented that case. >> Well, we we can't hear Walter. I'm sorry. >> Yeah.
>> Can't hear him unless he's sitting at the table. >> Need the microphone. >> Sorry. So, they're here complaining about my decision. And we haven't addressed that decision yet. And they said they're not
complaining about their >> and they're not complaining about the flooding. Just my decision. So, we're kind of getting a little far field. from where we from where this is from the the subject matter of >> well we haven't finished presenting and
so if you'll give us that opportunity um we'll do that and then if you still have an issue why don't you come back but uh I think that it makes the most sense if we can do our job and then you can do yours does that make sense to you >> well the you know you you're alleging
that you're challenging my decision >> I'm going to talk about that Now, Walter, so why don't you give me a chance to finish? >> Okay. >> All right. Could I just jump in here? >> Uh, no. Let's please keep this um, please. Um, on an even keel, um, Mr. Joe
Henning is going to be presenting the next section of your appeal and we just assume keep that going. >> Okay. Um, I wish to make two points tonight. The first is that the decision of the acting building inspector that our property was not flooded by water
emanating from their nursery is without merit and the issue must be sent back to the building inspector for further consideration of the facts. The second point is that enforcement of the provisions of the landscaping business use bylaw by the inspectional services
department has been extraordinarily lax. John Row and I are appealing against the decision of the acting building inspector not to enforce Milton General bylaw chapter 275 article 3 section 275-3.14
and thereby failing to protect our civil right to the protection of the bylaw Walter White's July 15th 2025 decision was I have no evidence to show that runoff from the nursery caused water to
enter your basement. I believe that the water leakage you experienced is due to the hydraology of the soil in that neighborhood generally and at least in this case not due to runoff from the nursery. If storm water had breached the
burm and run across your yard and into your basement, that would indicate that perhaps the burm was not designed properly. But apparently that's not what happened. The old fields also report that they have engaged the engineering
firm of Burke, Del Salah and Associates Incorporated to design the drainage system and to produce the report you mention. The firm has not yet delivered the report. So he says apparently that's not what happened yet. He had no way to
know that because he didn't look at our our pictures or videos and he didn't have the uh report from Del Burke. Um on 718 in an email to me, Mr. White admitted one that he was not
sufficiently expert in soil hydraology and two that he did not have the engineering report that the old fields were required to submit to the planning board by July 1st 2025. Mr. Walter White had no idea regarding the functioning of
the drainage system. In fact, the report of Delt is dated 826. John and I contend that neither Walter White nor Michael White conducted a proper investigation of the matter that John and I reported
and that too the July 15th decision of Walter White was not based on a proper review of all evidence. John and I ask that this board finds that the decision of the acting building inspector is arbitrary, whimsical, capriccious, and
made with gross negligence in bad faith or with malice. We ask that this board unanimously find that the acting building is building inspector's decision regarding flooding is without merit. And we asked the board
to send this issue back to Michael White, the head of inspectional services, to do a more thorough investigation of the matter, considering all evidence, including a site visit of the nursery's drainage system and a site
visit of the Johanning Row property. We asked this for several reasons. We have been offered no opportunity to show our photographs related to the flooding to Walter White. No one ever spoke with us about our complaint to fully understand
it, and no one from inspectional services ever visited our property to see what we consider to be the cause of the flooding. This meeting with the zoning board of appeals is the first and the only time that we have uh found a
way to show the acting building inspector, the building inspector our evidence regarding the flooding. We also have a report from our engineer Michael Giuliano that shows on the asbuilt plan an area before the start of the burm
which he believes is the highly probable source of the flooding of our property based on photographs taken at the time of the flooding. Mr. Giuliano was not permitted to enter the property. So, a more in-depth analysis was not possible.
As the landscaping business use bylaw requires a prompt cure of any material violation, we insist that Mr. Michael White work with Josh and Maggie Oldfield to determine the source of the flooding and to find a solution. Mr. Giuliano has
proposed an extension of the burm behind lot N128 as an inexpensive measure to prevent future flooding. If the building inspector is not able to work with there, Michael White must return to the zoning board of appeals to request the
revocation of the February 24, 2025 special permit as required in the bylaw. Subsequent to Mr. Walter White's decision on July 16th, 2025. We requested a meeting with him to show our
photographs of the flow of water from there onto our property, but he would not agree to meet. At no time did Mr. Walter White attempt to understand our complaint by speaking with us. He made a decision based on Josh Oldfield's
statements and a video. John and I made a records request for the video on July 18th. We never received it. We asked to review the video with Mr. Walter White on July 16th, but that never happened. We requested a meeting with Mr. Michael
White, the new head of inspectional services on July 24th. He responded that he needed to get up to speed on the issues. I met briefly with Michael White. When I went to his office on August 4th, I just showed up. We
accomplished nothing at the meeting. As residents, John and I do not believe that it should be so difficult to meet or to resolve matters with town officials, and we believe that this behavior is a further violation of our civil rights. Mr. Walter White had time
to speak with Josh Oldfield regarding our complaint, but not with us. We asked this board to instruct the building in inspector to take decisive action to uphold the landscaping business use bylaw which prohibits flooding on neighboring properties. We
believe that Michael White could resolve the flooding issue by requiring Theoer Nursery to have Dell at Al and Eaglebrook Engineering, our engineering firm, work together to fully investigate the adequacy of the current design to prevent flooding of neighboring
properties. If the engineers identify deficiencies in the current design, the building inspector must instruct there to immediately initiate and complete the necessary changes to prevent future flooding, which is a material violation of the bylaw. That solution was actually
proposed by Mr. Walter White in an email on August 7th. John Row and I have offered to engage our engineer Michael Giuliano from Eaglebrook Engineering in Danvers who has worked with Dell Ed in the past to again look at the drainage system at the
nursery and to determine if the system continues to function in a way to avoid flooding as required in the bylaw. Though it is not our responsibility, we have offered to pay for the services of Mr. Giuliano. Mr. Walter White stated in
his July 18th email, I think the best solution at this point is to have your engineer work with the cells Burke Salah to figure it out. I am not expert enough at soil hydrarology to get into a debate with an engineer about solving this
problem. So he has all Walter has already suggested this and I'm simply repeating his suggestion. Um the one of the big problems that John and I had was trying to figure out if
Walter's July 15th um uh decision was actually a final decision. We asked uh more than twice whether this was a final decision or not. We didn't know whether it was and so we had to appeal
in order to make our appeal within the right number of days. Um if his decision is I think that the best solution at this point is to have your engineer work with Delber Burke Salah that would be fine with us. We just didn't know what
was the his final decision on July 15th. It appeared to be his final decision that the water did not come from there. On August, but I think um our videos show that it does. On August 7th, Walter White reported that they nurseries
owners would not allow Michael Giuliano, our engineer, to enter their property to investigate if there was a problem with the drainage system at the we see no reason why the building inspector cannot ask the to have their engineer review our evidence. and why the building
inspector cannot require there to have to sell at al work with Eaglebrook to en ensure compliance with the bylaw. In the event of a serious violation of the bylaw, which is not cured timely, the building inspector must go to the zoning board of appeals to request revocation
of the special permit. The flooding from January 2024 was not corrected. Flooding reoccurred in July 2025, and the problems that caused the flooding have still not been resolved. Milton General Bylaws, Chapter 275, Article 3, Section
275-3.14, Landscaping Business Use, states the following requirements that we claim were violated by Mr. Walter White. One, upon application by the building commissioner during the term or extended term of the special permit, the special
permit may be revoked by the board of appeals after hearing in the event of a material violation which has not been promptly cured following notice from the building commissioner. Two, drainage measures shall not cause adverse drainage impacts on neighboring
properties. They shall not increase water flows on onto neighboring properties nor create ponding on neighboring properties. Uh as John pointed out, we didn't write the bylaw, but the bylaw was approved by twothirds
of town meeting and it was also approved by the attorney general of the Commonwealth. So it pretty much is what it is and it means what it says. The special permit shall number three. The special permit shall satisfy all requirements specified in this section
275-3.14 and may contain other requirements, terms, and conditions deemed necessary or appropriate by the planning board. The planning the >> this is this testimony has been submitted to us and we have it on the website. So,
>> well, I'd like to read it if if that's >> to read it in its entirety. >> Yeah, I did. Um, and it it takes 15 minutes in actuality. So, I don't think 15 minutes is a huge intrusion, but I want to be sure that everyone understands our point of view. And
apparently, um, for Mr. Walter White's satisfaction, I want to be sure that he understands why we're appealing his decision. Um, if that's okay with you. Is that okay with you or >> Yeah. I mean, just just sort of in the interest of, you know, keeping things moving along. This is a sentence.
>> I'm reading as quickly as I can. in the yeah >> on the website and been available. >> The spe uh the special permit for landscaping business use was issued by the planning board on February 24th, 2025 and it states that this special permit is issued with the following
additional terms and conditions. By July 1st, 2025, the applicants shall have shall have their drainage system inspected by their choice of either their engineer, who shall be a Massachusetts licensed civil engineer,
or a Town of Milton's engineer. The inspecting engineer shall attest that the drainage system is operating as designed by providing a letter to that effect to the planning board. John Row and I have reported to Mr. Walter White, the following three
material violations of the bylaw since the expiration of the 2019 special permit for landscaping business use in September 2024. Two of those violations are issues here. The third is mentioned only to demonstrate a pattern of
inaction and complete disregard for our civil rights under the bylaw. Following our complaints, the material violations were not promptly cured and the acting building commissioner took no meaningful action. Um, I'll I'll shorten this by
saying on July 10th, we experienced flooding in our yard and in our basement that appeared to emanate from the nursery. Uh, Walter White did not review uh any of the evidence that we had. Um,
on July 10th, 2025, I made a records request to Walter White for the drainage system engineering report that was supposed to be delivered to the planning board under the terms of the February 24th, 2025 special permit for landscaping business use by July 1st,
2025. Walter said that the report had not yet been delivered, and in fact, it wasn't delivered until um August 26th. Um, I mentioned to the honorable judge Kah Helain in Superior Court in Denim on
August 27th, 2025 that I had not yet seen the drainage report that was a requirement of the February 24th, 2025 special permit that was due on July 1st, 2025 for which I had made a records request on July 10th. Um, so my thought
about this matter is that they did not intend to furnish the report as required or they had not read the special permit and were unaware. If that were not so, why did it take six months for a professional engineering firm working
for the to supply a simple letter which truly lacked any type of investigation or analysis. Finally, our attorney, Matthew Dunn, discussed with us the expiration of the 2019 special permit in midepptember
2024. We decided not to take immediate action. >> That's um that's not an issue here at all. >> But what it is >> is the special permit that special permit that is the one that you are dealing with, not the one that expired. What it is is part of a pattern of lacks
enforcement by um the uh uh inspectional services department. We reported it um and Mr. Walter White wrote back to us and said that um Josh Oldfield thought
that he had another year and Josh was working on the application. I asked the town clerk for a copy of the application after it was turned in. It was a one-page application on the town form dated December 3rd. >> Mr. Johanning, that is not the issue
before us today. >> Lax enforcement is an issue for us. Um, and this is part of a pattern of lacks enforcement. Um, so as I said, this particular matter is meant to demonstrate a disturbing pattern of
indifference by inspectional services. It is now before Norfolk Superior Court involving the failure of the applicants and the Milton Planning Board to adhere to the requirements in the bylaw. In summary, John Row and I ask that the zoning board
of appeals unanimously reject the decision of Walter White, the acting building inspector, regarding one, the flooding of our property, and two, allowing the not to timely provide the engineering report as required by the
2025 special permit as arbitrary, whimsical, capriccious, and made with gross negligence in bad faith or malice. The decision regarding flooding was based on the most superficial and one-sided of investigations. Walter completely ignored the requirements of
the 2025 special permit regarding the engineering report. I remind the board that under the bylaw, it is the responsibility of the head of inspectional services to bring major violations of the bylaw that are not timely corrected to the zoning board of
appeals for possible revocation of the special permit. that did not occur in the three cases that we have cited, two of which are issues here. We asked this board to return these matters to Michael White, building inspector, for a more thorough review of the facts. We asked
the board to keep in mind when making its decision that John Row and I have offered to have our engineer work at our expense with their engineer at their expense to identify the source of the flooding problem and to work on a plan to correct the problem. The landscaping
business use bylaw prohibits flooding of neighboring properties. The elimination of future flooding events is a civil right that John and I have under the general bylaws of the town of Milton. John and I are under no obligation to pay a licensed engineer to solve this
problem. At the same time, we find it may save money for us, the town, and the old fields to spend some money now to solve the problem rather than to fight about this uh this further violation of the bylaw in Norfolk Superior Court.
Prompt implementation of any improvements to the drainage system identified by the engineers may solve the problem in the same way as it was solved from 2016 to 2024. That's all I have to say. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Mr. Janning, >> Mr. White. >> Thank you. So, um I guess uh you had started to speak and we sort of cut you off to sort of have Mr. Joanning finish up um but um if you could sort of enlighten both Mr.
White the other Mr. White and the and the board as to as to what happened um in July and uh and what steps you had taken. >> Sure. So, I've been working in Milton part-time as a local inspector for about 12 years.
And as you know or you may know, we've had uh we've been out with without >> pretty much of a revolving door in >> full-time commissioner. So having been in, >> you know, been in that seat in other towns in my career,
I I stepped in and was acting as the building commissioner. And my first involvement with the um during my tenure here was when the permit expired from, you know, the five-year special permit that they had. And that was the
first time that I went up and spoke to Maggie first and said, "Your permits expired." And they just didn't know it >> or had lost track or whatever. >> So then, um, fast forward to the flood,
which was what, July? July 10th. July 10th, I get an email from Josh unsolicited saying, "I checked the um I checked the drainage and the the drain going out the hillside is free and clear. It's all
cleaned out." And I said, "Okay." And then I get the complaint from Mr. Johanning and Mr. Row. Mhm. >> So I knew that um Delber Burke Salo was involved
>> in the engine in the engineering um and I I I was you know and I and Mr. Johanning I believe had said that there was supposed to be a letter forthcoming from them. So that's when I started asking
u the old fields for that letter >> which they hadn't received yet. So, um, my focus was then, um, I'm not sure how I found out, but that there was another engineer involved.
>> Um, who we heard from tonight, >> and apparently their engineer, Ian Burke, designed the Burm at the back of the the U property. Uh we he didn't have any pictures of
that, but it's a it's a burm all the way along the back of the property. In some places, it's three or four feet high and it's got a drain that goes out the hillside street, goes directly into a a a storm drain, >> right?
>> But somehow the water was coming apparently coming across and a lot of it was going through their budding property and then coming onto their property. Um, but I'm not going to get between two
engineers who designed the original system. >> Mhm. >> And you know, as I'm sitting here tonight listening to the other engineers testimony, it seems like the the system wasn't designed to handle this volume of water.
Mhm. >> They're alleging that there was some change on the Ofield property site that changed the drainage pattern, but um to my knowledge, and I haven't asked them the question,
>> did they change anything on that site that would have changed the drainage pattern? >> And uh they mentioned the card property, that's a new house that was built, so that's got to have some effect on it.
So, you know, um my what I'm thinking now is that the the engineers design wasn't sufficient to handle this type of water volume. >> Mhm. So, and that's why I suggested,
you know, I didn't know at the time that that's that's where I was heading, but my initial point was let the engineers get together and figure it out, especially in light of the history of this this property
and the the special permits and and all that. So, you know, I had I I forget I I I did say I Mr. Janning's correct in that email that I sent that your engineer should get together with
Burke and figure it out. >> Mhm. >> And I think uh and I was just waiting for that to happen. >> Um and I hadn't heard back from them. I went back to um the old fields a couple of times and said, "Where is Burke's
letter? We need to get that letter >> to to get this started. >> And as people may know, they're they're a very um busy uh engineering firm. >> They're very popular. Like it seems like
everybody in the world uses them >> and um you know, I can understand why it would take some you know, people in that in that field a while to get a letter. not excusing it, but >> um so I'm waiting for the letter and and
I did make a couple of attempts going up there and saying where's the letter and the letter finally came in August sometime and uh but I had heard nothing from uh Mr. Johanning or Mr. Row about their engineer >> and you know in
um trying to get that discussion started and to try and figure it out. So that's who we are. And they felt apparently, as they said, that they were running out of time to make an appeal of my decision, which really wasn't a
decision. >> Well, I mean, the case law is is kind of sketchy. I mean, it's is kind of clear about this. They really had to do something because they're if they don't file it in time. >> No, I understand. I understand. >> I can see why they would have making made that step.
>> Sure. Um um u Jeff or um Michael, do you have any questions for Walter White? >> I don't have any questions. Thank you. >> No, thank you. >> Thank you.
>> You're welcome. >> Um is there anybody else in the um in Zoom or in the room that would like to say something to the board about this matter? Not seeing anyone on the Zoom. >> Okay. >> No hands,
>> gentlemen. Any questions uh from you folks? >> Jeff and Michael? >> No. No question. Thank you. >> No questions. Thank you. >> Mr. White, did you want to jump in on anything or >> like I said, I'm fairly new to it. So, I
have gone with Walter uh August 5th, I think, was the first trip just to get my eyes on what was going on. And I think back then we didn't see any evidence of any breakthrough. So, I think the whole time the talk was that there was a
breakthrough of the burm. And I think just recently with the the eagle engineering that he thinks it may be going around a portion of it. So the whole time we were looking for a >> Oh yeah. >> a physical break somewhere.
>> And I think all that I had I actually it took me a little bit to hunt down. I think there's the main decision and three separate amendments to it. I actually tracked all that down and took it with me and one item by item walked through the whole list and the engineers
report on the drainage system >> and they believe there were four dead shrubs which >> you had mentioned that >> they actually there were only four. They planted 13 new ones and we actually went out today to check on that. I've been so busy I haven't had time to get back out
there. Then the 26th, I believe, we received the engineers letter, which without that we we couldn't do anything. We're not engineers, so we needed to see what his report said and went out a actually I think I had
gone back >> Mhm. uh early September to see if the four shrubs had been replaced and they had and they said we we'll have them in >> this weekend to come back and I just finally had time today Walter and I went
back walked the whole Burm again looking for some kind of breakthrough and didn't see anything. I actually when I got back because I'm not famili completely familiar with the town, I was just curious about the surrounding elevations. I'm not an
engineer. I just went on to >> Oh, yeah. I saw >> Mass GIS >> and just took like a westerly line straight through 23 Parkwood, straight through Thea and continued it to the end of Milton.
>> Mhm. in that elevation. I'm assuming it's on Blue Hills was around 500 foot above sea level. I believe 23 Parkwoods at about 181 ft above sea
level. So that's like a 319 ft elevation >> pitching down toward the Parkwood. Then to the the south I think is a straight line if Parkwood followed to
the end was like a 60 ft elevation. So you got a 60 ft drop and a 320 colliding unfortunately right at the >> in Parkwood area and it continues >> down um
what street was it? down toward the the reservoirs. It came to a 50 foot, but they're almost like at the bottom of a bowl with those two elevations slamming into that property. >> So, I'm sure there's a tremendous amount
of water just naturally heading that way. >> Can I say something? >> No. Uh just sec hand raised >> a remote >> attendee Rick Curtis. Did you want to
hear from him? >> Um yes. >> Okay. >> And then >> Mr. Curtis, you can speak now. >> Okay. Great. Can you hear me? >> Yes. >> Oh, wonderful. Okay. Thank you. I'll I'll be very quick here. My name is Rick
Curtis. I live in Marshfield with my wife Joan. Uh my parents and I were uh residents of Milton uh for over 34 years and my my parents built that house in 1967. I was a young teenager and I testified to this and I'm reiterating
what I testified to in a deposition over 15 years ago when the the owners of Pocket Drive were suing the nursery. So back then as a young teenager, I helped my father many many times get rid of water in the cellar and we we found out
that when it rained, not just a drizzle, but when it rained, the window wells would fill up and the water would subsequently come through the window into the uh basement. So we didn't know what to do. We called a good friend of ours, Gus Bosworth from Bosworth
Construction, who lived down the end of the street at that time. He brought a a backhoe to the property. My parents had not built the pool yet. And he dug at least 20 foot long ditches from each window well, put PVC pipe in it. And at
the end of those ditches, he dug a big drywill, very big deep drywall, and filled it with stone. Now, to the best of my recollection, that worked for a long time. uh a few years after my parents built
the home, they they built the pool. Uh and so we found out uh that the whole area is is that the the the uh the composition of the soil is clay which as you know doesn't permit water to to flow
through and permeate easily. And also we found out that there are a number of springs in that area on in the ground. In fact, my father would boast every year that in the springtime when the water table and when and especially a
very high water table in the spring and summertime uh uh from the uh from the runoff from Blue Hills and the and the melting of the snow, my father would boast. All he had to do was open up a valve and it would fill the swimming pool every year and and it wouldn't cost
us a penny. All natural spring water. So, on behalf of Megan and Josh, I just wanted to reiterate the same info that I gave under testimony under oath uh 15 more or more years ago in a deposition. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Mr. Curtis. [Music] >> Would you come up, please, and just state your name? My name is Josh Oldfield, 24 Forest Street Milton, one of the owners of Thea Nursery. With respect to the drainage
system, we've designed and installed as mandated and it's maintained as we should. Um, there's been a lot of legal litigation over this system and I'm afraid of changing
what we need to do because it could affect legal previous little legal litigation decisions. So, that's my challenge here. >> So, um, we've been down this path many many times with this crew and that's where we
stand. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Oakfield. Anyone else? >> Yes. Come up to the >> Phil Henning. Um I only want to make one final comment. Um and that is the
pictures are the pictures. They show the flow uh that we suffer from. Um we have the suggestion from uh a licensed professional engineer. Um and with
respect to uh flooding um yeah there have been um challenges uh between us and and uh the old fields. But I guess what I would do is urge everyone here to find a solution and not
fight it. Um because uh we did um our finished basement was uh pretty much destroyed in 2014. Um we had a tort action against uh theer
and the old fields in 2014. Um court records show that the uh case was settled in 2016 and if that should happen again we'll be back again. So the best way for all of us to live together
and to uh find a solution is to find a solution. Um and if the professional engineers got together and they get and they say okay this is is the best solution we live with it. Unlike what Mr. Curtis said we do not have flooding.
We had flooding once or twice in in January 2024 and we had flooding once in July. We had no flooding from 2016 to 2024.
That system worked great. We worked together. We created a system that that eliminated our problem and we can do that again. Um, so, uh, I would urge everyone like, let's not fight about
this. Let's solve the problem. Let's, uh, have Mr. uh, Michael White take a look at the facts. And one of the things that disturbed me was that, uh, Michael White talked about going to the nursery.
No one came to us. No one reviewed anything that we had. And we've had it all along. Um, no one visited our lot. No one walked up the lane to see uh uh what we were talking about. No one did
that. And that's part of what I'm talking about when I say um it was a poor investigation of the facts. So, let's work together. Let's not just talk to one party. Let's talk to both parties. Michael White, Walter White,
anybody who wants to come can come to uh 23 Parkwood and take a look. Um if the decision of the of both engineers working together is whatever it is, um we'll live with that. But I I just want
to uh say that it is not our goal to fight. We want to live in peace with their nursery and with the old fields. And I think it's possible at this juncture and we should try to do that. And we should not try not to make the change that could make everybody happy
and could save everybody money including the town of Milton. You know, I I remember years ago asking um Ann Marie Fagan um what amount of money has been spent by the town of Milton um on legal
matters relating to Johanning Row and they nursery and she said between 250,000 and 300,000 that was years ago. So let's stop this. Let's get over this. Uh we've spent money. The old fields have spent money. The town has spent
money. Let's spend money to solve the problem and eliminate this this issue. Flooding does hurt us. And unlike what Mr. Curtis said, we don't have flooding. We don't have flooding. Um it's just
this time and I think it was because the burm needs to be extended. What exactly changed it there? I don't know. But let's not worry about that. Let's just get the engineers together. Let's let them uh find a solution. Uh let's move
on and let's stop spending money on fighting each other. That's all I have to say. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Miss Oldfield. >> Hi, I'm Maggie Yfield. I live at 237 Hillside Street. Um I'd just like to
make a couple points. Um the first point is the Massachusetts storm water standards governs all development and the basic standards um there are three of them. One is that storm water management systems shall be designed so that postdevelopment
peak discharge rates do not exceed pre-development peak discharge rates. Two, the redevelopment project is required to meet these standards only to the maximum extent practicable.
And three, a long-term operation and maintenance plan shall be developed and implemented to ensure that storm water management systems functions as designed. We have continued to meet these three
standards for the past 10 or 15 years and four different building inspectors have agreed. Second point, the nursery has not done any changes on our property. Um back in 2020, as was mentioned
earlier, a new house was built um um next to us. the um applicants tonight, they did have their engineer review it. Um I did speak at the ZBA hearing about
it and I specifically stated I hope that whatever the ZBA does in granting this permit, they had to bring in in excess of a thousand cubic yards of fill to create this um above ground septic tank.
and I said,"I not going to um um have any objections to this so long as there'll be no impact on our drainage system." So, we made our concerns known to the
town of Milton back then. The ZBA granted that variance and we have very nice neighbors. Um, third point, we are in the Scotswood district of Milton, which sits on the edge of the Blue Hills and within the Nepon River watershed.
We sit within 7,000 acres of the Blue Hill Reservation and we're a subbasin within 120 miles of the Neponet River watershed. Um, Scots Woods is about 122 acres and
has a hilly residential area with a downs slope flow into a larger managed natural watershed. The runoff from the Blue Hills feeds a network of brooks including pine tree and continues to flow all the way to the
Nepona River. As a residential area bordering a protected reservation, Scotswoods is impacted by storm water runoff from uphill and from public streets and private properties. Runoff is a is a huge concern for all the
residents in our neighborhood, not just one property. Changing precipitation patterns due to climate change also affect the area's hydra hydraology. And climate change will bring more intense rain and snow events that can exasperate storm water flooding
everywhere. Our fields and plant material act as a natural sponge absorbing excess water and heavy rains to help mitigate downstream flooding. Our fields and open spaces also recharge the groundwater. And what would the flooding be like if
we were to develop and densify our property by adding more imperous surfaces? Imagine what would happen to Scott's Woods if we weren't there. >> Thank you. Thank you, Miss Opio.
>> Mr. Chairman, may I just >> We just >> May I May I say >> No. Could I just No, sorry. I just want to find out if there's anyone else that needs to has raised a hand, asked any questions. Okay, >> hold on. I'll be quick.
I think it's I don't think I need to say this. Um, it should be clear, but there will never be a solution if there's no cooperation with their nursery and they've just said that they don't want to cooperate with
us. We are paying offering to pay our our engineer to work with their engineer and I shouldn't have to pay. We want to solve the flooding. And so I think that we're looking for this board to
make some kind of directive that forces their nursery to work with our our our engineer so that we can all solve the problem together. And I don't want to nobody wants to see us again, right? And
our engineer has come up with a solution, but nothing can ever be implemented without the cooperation of their nursery and they've already stated that they will not work with our our engineer. So, um, we're looking for some help there. Thank you.
>> Thank you, >> gentlemen. Jeff and Michael, >> I don't have any further questions. >> Neither do I. >> I think it might be appropriate at this point to um close the public hearing
>> and I'd take a motion to that effect. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Thank you. Um and the board now will discuss um the uh action the request before us which is to um to uh consider
whether we would um direct the building inspectors to go back and investigate the situation with the flooding at 23 Parkwood and the nursery um and um sort of overturn the decision of the building inspector in
July um not to take any further action on the uh on the permit. Um thoughts, Mr. Gentleman? >> I I I have some thoughts if if it's appropriate. >> Yeah, that would be great. >> All right. So, first thing I want to say
is I appreciate the record that's been compiled. So, thank you to Mr. Joe Henning and Mr. Row. The second thing is I see the commissioners, the then commissioner, Mr. Walter White's correspondence in his view, but I agree with him that it's not a final decision.
It does. It appears anything but a final decision. It appears to be an indication they didn't have sufficient facts and he asked for more information to to reach a conclusion. I can see where that might be read as a decision and therefore what caused this hearing to be
held, but I don't think that it is and I think that it's fair to say that. With that said, um we do have a request from an abuter to enforce a special permit issued by the planning board and where this we are the enforcement
we are the enforcement entity of a of a decision of the building inspector. I think uh I agree with Mr. Joe Henning that this should be sent back to the building commissioner for additional consideration for the con conclusion of
the finding consistent with what Mr. Walter White said. So I actually think they were saying the same thing. I don't think it's necessary to find that the decision was arbitrary or to otherwise disparage Walter's record uh or the
acting commissioner's record at the time. I I don't think that's necessary. I don't I don't think that's um appropriate for the board, but I do think that I would urge the board to have this matter, for lack of a better term, remanded to the building inspector for a finding as to whether or not the
permit has been violated. Um I think that it should mandate that there's there be a site visit and uh I would invite the thea nursery um u holders of the permit to participate uh in that.
And I I that makes sense to me. I also find I also think it's appropriate that the Eaglebrook engineering and survey report that was submitted and Mr. Giuliani's Giuliano's testimony seems to me to have credibility, but I don't
think we have enough facts to conclude it one way or the other. If the building commissioner finds that the permit has been violated and issues an appropriate a remedy that he believes to be appropriate that Mr. Joe Henning and Mr.
Row disagree with they have a perfect right to appeal that as well and they can do that at their option. Um on the other hand if they find that the permit is not being violated they can also appeal that. But I think if we
remand this back to the commissioner for further determination on compliance with the terms of the permit, that would be an appropriate action that would actually end this hearing tonight. Uh subject to a further finding and
appropriate action by the initially the commissioner's office and subsequently by the appellants should should they choose to do so. And that's my recommendation to the board. >> Thank you, Jeff. Michael. >> Uh, thank you, Jeff. Thank you, Madam
Chair. Um, I I agree with everything Mr. Mullen said. I, you know, I think that, um, first of all, thank you to everybody involved for putting the record together and working so hard to give us as much information as possible. Um, but I also think that the building inspector
perhaps did not um, have the benefit of all the facts. And I also think that um you know the videos and photographs are helpful but you know big rainstorms by by definition are infrequent and difficult to uh investigate after they
occur. Um and given that both sides have uh experts engaged um and given that this is an ongoing issue I agree with everything Mr. Mullen just said. >> Thank you gentlemen. I agree with Mr. Mullen as well. I also don't think that
um uh that Mr. Walter White had all the information that we now do have before us um when he was walking on the property. Um we also, as as has been pointed out, have had some changes in staff um and some grateful additions
since um this whole process started. And um I would also agree that the um July um 10th storm was pretty incredible as a person that was on the expressway before it got closed. Um so uh I would um I I
don't uh think that we we need to um characterize Mr. White's decision the way the applicants have. But I would remand I would support a remand back to the building inspectors for further investigation and encourage um the uh
the applicants and uh and and the nursery to have their engineers speak to each other. One of the things that has concerned me about all of this is that I'm not certain about the source of the water. um you know you can say that it's come from some adjacent property but
could also because of the high the high amount of rain that that could have been groundwater as well. And so I think that would be something else I would suggest to the building inspectors to take a look at with their engineers as to how much of that's groundwater and how much of that storm water because there's a
difference. Um, and so I would support a motion to uh remand this um uh this matter back to the building um department for further investigation and consultation with those engineers. >> Second.
>> Do I have a vote? >> I seconded the motion. So >> Oh, yeah. >> I I support that. >> All in favor? >> I >> I >> I from Kathleen O'Donnell. Hi. >> That's our decision is to remand it back
to the building inspectors and um and hope that they can uh take a look at the in the all the incredible information that was provided by Mr. Johanning and Mr. Row the their engineers um um and
also looking at Del Burke to sort of take a look to see whether or not um the addition another piece of the burn may may help or not. If it's groundwater that's not going to make any difference. So I think that's what something we all have to look at and I'd take a motion to
uh adjourn the hearing. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I >> I >> thank you all very much everybody for attending. >> Thank you gentlemen. >> Thank you. See you later Mike. Bye Jeff.
Thanks Kathleen. >> You're welcome. Thanks Michael.