►
From YouTube: Committee on Government Operations on September 17, 2019
Description
Docket #1264 - Hearing regarding a Home Rule Petition to the General Court entitled “An Act Authorizing the Boston Redevelopment Authority to Grant Easements for Utility Purposes over a Portion of a Certain Parcel of Land Located in the City of Boston”.
A
Party
chair
of
the
government,
Operations
Committee
today
is
Tuesday
September
the
17th,
and
we
are
here
today
to
discuss
docket
1
to
64
message
in
order
approving
a
Home
Rule
petition
to
the
General
Court
entitled
an
act
authorizing
the
Boston
Redevelopment
Authority
to
grant
easements
for
utility
purposes
over
a
portion
of
a
certain
parcel
of
land
located
in
the
city
of
Boston.
The
matter
was
sponsored
by
mayor
Marty
Walsh
referred
to
the
Committee
on
September,
the
11th
of
2017.
As
stated
in
the
transmittal
from
mayor
Walsh.
A
This
Home
Rule
petition
seeks
to
allow
existing
property
owners
and
their
tenants
to
update
the
utility
infrastructure
on
the
property
and
to
continue
its
current
use
along
the
Long
Wharf.
The
Home
Rule
petition
specifies
electric
and
cable
companies,
specifically
ensta
Verizon
in
Comcast,
who
would
have
to
enter
into
a
contract
with
the
Boston
Regional
Authority
in
relation
to
this
easement.
A
A
It's
busy
and
followed
by
Ian,
Rogan
and
followed
by
Joshua,
looks
like
Sydney
will
be
followed
by
Mary
McGee
will
be
followed
by
Thomas
Schiavoni
and
then,
if
there's
any
additional
public
testimony
other
than
that
will
shift
to
the
panel
and
then,
if
we
have
additional
folks
indicating
and
desire
to
speak
publicly,
we
will
address
them.
So
with
that
Viktor,
it's
good
to
see
you
welcome
back
to
the
City
Council
good.
B
You
for
inviting
me,
and
although
my
affiliation
is
Nura,
I
must
say
that
this
has
not
been
presented
to
new
array
and
I.
Don't
represent
them
for
for
a
vote.
But
so
my
comments
are
my
personal
comments
and
they
are
procedural
because
I
cannot
address
substantively
what
is
being
requested,
because
I
have
seen
no
plans.
I've
seen
no
details,
I,
don't
know
whether
the
easements
will
be
permanent
or
temporary
and
so
forth.
B
B
I
will
just
quickly
skim
over
them,
because
I'm
sure
that
that
you
all
know
about
them
that,
ten
or
twelve
years
ago
the
b
ra
decided
they
wanted
to
put
a
restaurant
at
the
end
of
Long
Wharf.
Ten
North
and
residents
said
that
is
not
what
ought
to
be
done
at
the
end
of
the
Long
Wharf
I'm
reminded
when
I
go
into
the
Bob's
of
Boston
Public
Library
free
to
all
the
Boston
Public
Libraries
motto.
That
was
pretty
much
with
what
motivated
us
in
in
ten
years
ago.
B
Ten
of
us
brought
a
lawsuit
which,
when
in
this
in
the
state
court,
when
it
was
cleared,
that
the
judge
was
leaning
in
our
direction
and
away
from
the
b
ra,
the
b
ra
brought
a
lawsuit
in
the
federal
court
federal
district
court
of
Massachusetts
against
the
National
Park
Service.
The
that
lawsuit
was
decided
in
favor
of
the
National
Park
Service
against
the
be
ra
that
was
appealed.
B
So
that
brings
us
here
today
brings
me
here
today
to
say
that
what
was
applicable
in
1983
continues
to
be
applicable.
Now
that
is,
that
National
Park
Service
approval
is
required
and
I'd
like
to
conclude
with
just
a
reading
the
conclusion
of
the
decision
in
the
federal
appeals
court,
which
is,
although
we
need
go
no
further.
We
think
an
additional
comment
is
clear:
it's
in
order.
B
Sorry,
the
b
ra
complains
that,
by
upholding
National
Park
Service's
decision,
we
will
be
allowing
the
agency
to
recoat
restrict
the
entirety
of
an
invaluable
piece
of
the
Boston
waterfront
and
perpetuity
end
quote:
this
complaint
is
groundless,
as
we
have
already
explained
the
limitation
of
the
pavilion
area,
but
it
applies.
The
limitation
applies
throughout
to
the
entirety
of
Long
Wharf.
That
is
the
portion
that's
owned
by
the
VRA.
B
As
we
have
explained,
the
limitation
of
the
pavilion
area
to
public
outdoor
recreational
use
is
exactly
what
the
Bri
offered
when
it
applied
for
and
received
over
three-quarters
of
a
million
dollars
in
federal
financial
assistance.
For
now
at
least
the
long
war
over
Long
Wharf
is
at
an
end,
based
on
the
reasoning
elaborated
above.
B
The
judgment
of
the
district
court
is
affirmed,
so
after
a
long
war
over
Long
Wharf,
we
now
stand
where
we
were
in
1983,
that
is,
that
the
National
Park
Service
must
be
contacted
if
they
must
give
their
approval
disapproval
or
whatever
they
want
to
give
and
I
would
suggest,
therefore,
procedurally,
that
no
action
be
taken
on
this
Home
Rule
petition
until
the
National
Park
Service
has
spoken.
Thank
you
thank.
C
Good
afternoon
councillors,
my
name
is
Angela
Holm
I'm,
the
director
of
government
and
regulatory
affairs
for
Comcast
here
today
to
provide
remarks
and
testimony
regarding
the
proposed
legislative
act
that
would
allow
for
an
easement
agreement.
I
could
say
that
we
we
are
not
opposed
to
the
passage
of
this
act.
C
We
look
forward
to
a
time
when
we
can
provide
services
to
this
parcel
and
we
have
no
problems
with
either
section
1
or
section
2
of
the
legislation,
as
proposed
where
we
do
have
material
concerns
at
this
time
is
in
sections
3
and
section
4
specifically
for
section
3.
I
would
like
to
stress
our
material
concerns
with
the
compensation
methods
provided
for
and
the
proposed
easement
legislation,
specifically
that
the
compensation
method
is
referred
to
as
a
condition
of
the
easement,
rather
than
establishing
a
means
of
fair
negotiations
or
proportionate
costs.
C
So
I
just
want
to
put
that
on
the
record.
We
again
Comcast
maintains
as
interested
in
survey
surfacing
this
parcel.
We
did
not
oppose
the
passage
of
this
act,
but
we
would
like
to
see
section
threes,
language
reworked,
but
to
make
it
more
economically
feasible
for
Comcast
to
provide
our
services
regarding
Section
four.
We
would
just
move
to
strike
certain
language
from
section
four,
as
we
don't
see
it
necessary
or
productive
for
to
hold
full
liability
for
the
entire
parcel,
rather
just
the
portion
of
the
land
to
which
we
would
use
so
I.
C
A
A
C
A
C
Primary
concern
remains
section
3
and
the
way
that
methodology
has
worked
out
for
compensation.
We
want
this
to
be
feasible
for
us,
we
want
to
be
able
to
provide
our
services
to
the
parcel,
but
not
not
the
way
it's
written
as
it
is
now.
I'd
also
like
to
point
out
for
the
record
that
the
correct
legal
name
for
Comcast
in
this
context,
both
for
the
legislation
and
for
the
easement
agreement
itself,
should
be
Comcast
of
Boston
Inc,
organized
sorry
organized
under
the
laws
of
New
York,
okay,.
A
D
D
We
just
don't
know
because
there's
been
no
public
process
found
out
about
the
hearing
over
the
weekend,
and
it
was
just
announced
on
Friday
the
petition
references
documents.
In
a
plan
we
haven't
seen
the
documents
we
haven't,
seen
the
plan
and
now
I'm
finding
out.
We
actually
haven't
even
seen
the
whole
petition,
and
so
we
don't
know
what's
there
at
present,
why
what's
there
at
present
is
an
adequate.
D
D
We
have
zoning
and
licensing
committee,
it's
very
easy
to
get
on
the
agenda
of
that
committee,
there's
a
meeting
once
a
month
and
then
within
a
week
or
two
after
that
the
matter
comes
before
our
monthly
meeting,
so
we're
not
asking
for
any
particular
delay
just
that
we
have
a
chance
to
find
out
what
this
is
all
about
at
where
this
is
a
site
of
such
historic
importance
to
the
all
the
residents
of
the
city.
Thank
you
thank.
E
E
Ms
McGee
has
pointed
out
that
the
neighborhood
residents
Association,
has
not
had
an
opportunity
to
review
and
we
respect
this
process
of
representative
democracy,
our
immediate
councilor
from
our
district
and
at
large
and
the
others
who
care
about
our
city
and
the
only
thing
that
we
ask
is
participatory
democracy
and
we're
not
seeking
to
delay
this,
but
just
give
us
an
opportunity
to
participate
in
the
process,
and
then
you
will
have
the
final
ability
to
determine
whether
or
not
it's
in
the
public
interest.
Thank
you
very.
A
F
I'm
Richard
McGinnis
deputy
director
for
climate
change
and
environmental
planning
from
the
Boston
Planning
and
Development
Agency,
the
Boston
Planning
development
agency
owns
and
manages
Long
Wharf
a
historic
property
along
our
downtown
waterfront
planned
and
operated
as
a
mix
of
commercial
water
dependent
in
open
space
uses.
We
support
the
legislation
to
allow
subsurface
easements
for
our
tenants
and
about
ours
within
the
property
protected
pursuant
to
Article
97's
Commonwealth's
constitution.
We
understand
this
legislation
is
needed
based
upon
the
feedback
we
received
from
the
states,
the
Commonwealth's
division
of
conservation
services.
F
We
don't
disagree
with
the
observations
of
a
protected,
open
space
out
there.
We
flagged
this
when
we
when
this
these
easements
were
requested
to
us.
We
reached
out
to
the
Commonwealth
that
oversees
article
97
protected
open
space
but
they're
also
the
local
representative
national
park
service,
and
they
explained
to
us
that
national
park
service
there
is
an
issue
with
the
National
Park
Service
layer
of
protection
for
subsurface
utilities,
it's
more
of
an
article
97
issue.
F
So
it's
a
state,
you
know
protected
open
space
and
that
typically,
those
are
modified
through
legislation
to
allow
these
these
easements.
If
you
look
at
Long
Wharf,
there's
a
web
of
easements
that
already
exists,
including
have
a
source
and
other
utilities,
Boston
water,
sewer,
MWRA
that
were
pre-existing
and
are
maintained
from
time
to
time.
So
we
did
reach
out
to
the
state,
don't
they
don't
believe?
It's
a
National,
Park
Service
issue,
it's
more
of
a
state
issue.
F
They
state
that
you
can
put
subsurface
utility
lines
underneath
protected
open
space,
provided
that
they
are
granted
legislative
relief
and
that's
why
the
the
legislation
was
put
forward.
We
agree
we're
happy
to
do
some
outreach
with
Noura
and
others
to
let
them
know
about
our
protocol,
we're
approached
by
either
our
tenants
or
property
owners
to
do
work
within
our
right-of-way.
Those
are
reviewed
by
our
capital
construction
people
if
there
are
any
above-ground,
disturbances
or
structures.
Those
are
reviewed
by
urban
design
staff
to
make
sure
they're
consistent
with
the
property
being
disturbed.
So
we
do.
F
F
We
don't
believe
these
utility
easements
will
cause
any
harm
to
the
public
way.
The
surface
will
have
to
be
restored
to
its
original
condition,
but
these
utilities
also
support
the
businesses
that
are
out
there,
including
Boston
Harbor
cruises,
we're
looking
to
expand
gateway
to
Boston
Harbor
Islands
Maryna.
F
So
it's
not
just
the
commercial
properties,
but
also
the
water
dependent
properties
that
are
that
are
out
there.
We
require
a
fee
for
any
property,
that's
licensed
by
us,
so
we'd
expect
the
same
for
any
utilities
using
BPD
a
property
for
our
private
purposes.
So
we
support
section
3.
This
is
distinct
from
a
city
roadway.
This
is
BPD
a
owned
property
and
any
type
of
easement
or
license
agreement
requires
a
fee
to
us
for
our
care
and
maintenance
of
our
of
our
properties.
Thank
you.
G
You
very
much
for
the
record:
Lawrence
istikhara,
10,
post
office
square
and
I
represent
capital
properties,
the
owner
of
record
of
the
trout
house
and
the
custom
house
block
these
two
buildings
have
been
a
long
war
for
a
long
time.
The
trout
house
precedes
the
creation
of
the
city
of
Boston
and
we
believe,
dates
back
approximately
275
years.
It
was
used
as
a
Counting
house
by
one
John
Hancock,
who
serves
as
one
of
the
city's
bankers.
In
fact,
if
you
ever
go
there,
the
restaurant,
his
safe,
is
still
there
so
he's
a
really
historic
building.
G
G
We
also
think
the
building
was
longer
at
a
point
in
time,
went
further
out
towards
the
water
and
I
also
understand
just
from
having
been
around
a
bit
that
this
part
of
the
city
was
all
but
abandoned.
In
the
years
after
World
War
Two,
the
elevated
train
was
taken
down
in
the
40s.
They
used
the
metal
for
the
war
effort.
G
Then
a
surface
train
that
went
back
and
forth
over
cobblestones
for
many
years
and
then
this
council
over
fifty
years
ago,
before
my
time,
adopted
the
waterfront
urban
renewal
plan
under
the
encouragement
of
the
chamber
of
commerce,
Frank
Christian
among
other
people
and
as
a
result
of
that,
all
the
land.
But
not
the
buildings,
were
taken
by
the
VRA
and
that's
the
order
of
taking
that
is
attached
as
a
matter
of
reference
and
the
goal
being
that
all
the
space
which
was
not
built
upon
should
in
fact
be
available
as
open
space.
G
G
An
extension
of
State
Street
probably
had
been
the
same
for
a
long
time,
going
back
to
a
time
when
there
were
cobblestones
and
people
would
drive
wagons
down
there
with
horses
in
order
to
get
things
off
of
boats,
because
obviously
there
was
no
service
and
the
Blue
Line
tunnels
beneath
the
street
more
or
less
a
hundred
years,
and
we
believe
there's
been
electrical
service
and
telephone
service
to
these
buildings.
Back
to
the
time
of
mr.
Edison
and
mr.
G
Bell,
once
again,
there's
no
permits
to
prove
exactly
when
either
would
have
occurred,
and
what
we're
asking
for
today
is
to
in
fact
provide
new
service
to
these
old
buildings.
So
it
can
be
efficient
and
modern,
as
opposed
to
the
systems
that
may
have
been
under
the
ground
for
a
hundred
or
so
years.
G
When
the
concerns
were
raised
about
the
activation
of
the
pavilion,
the
license
establishment,
there
was
a
court
suit
and
mr.
Bronte
made
reference
to
that.
If
he
was
in
the
plaintiff,
he
knew
some
of
the
people
who
were
and
as
a
result
of
the
decision
by
the
Court
of
Appeals
I.
Think
it's
fair
to
say.
G
The
VRA
does
not
want
to
imperil
the
ability
of
the
agency
to
secure
federal
funds
and
that's
why
there's
an
ongoing
discussion
between
the
VRA
and
the
state,
specifically
Melissa,
crying
who
is
at
I/o
EEA
and
who
serves
as
the
agent
for
the
National
Park
Service
here
in
Massachusetts.
Earlier
this
summer,
miss
crying
told
mr.
G
Now
Boston's
been
granting
subsurface
easements
for
a
long
time
sitting
in
that
chair.
Mr.
chairman,
I
chaired
the
committee
in
either
79
80
81,
it
all
blurs
after
a
while
that
provided
subsurface
easements
for
the
devonshire
and
subsurface
easements
for
50
milk
Street,
and
he
was
done.
My
vote
of
this
council
didn't
have
to
go
to
the
National
Park
Service
didn't
have
to
go
the
legislature
because
we're
talking
about
city,
sidewalks,
the
foundations
of
those
buildings,
are
beneath
the
public
way.
G
Many
many
years
later,
when
I
was
in
private
practice,
I
represented
Norman
Leventhal
and
we
secured
subsurface
ease,
475
State
Street
and
if
one
is
ever
in
that
garage
and
truth
be
told,
I
never
have
been.
A
piece
of
that
garage
is
underneath
the
public
way,
that's
how
they
provided
the
maximum
number
of
spaces
and
squared
off
the
lot
and
I
expect.
Mr.
G
Many
of
these
article
97
Sisco
straight
to
the
Statehouse
and
the
drafting
of
this
document
followed
the
patterns
of
five
separate,
similar
bills,
which
have
been
passed
pursuant
to
article
97,
and
they
really
have
a
very
simple
format
that
there's
an
identification
of
where
the
real
estate
is
and
there's
also
consideration.
And
consideration
is
what
Rich
McGinnis
referenced.
That
the
BPD
a
always
seeks
some
type
of
consideration
for
the
use
of
that
subsurface
space
in
Rogan
is
available.
G
If
there's
any
questions,
she
manages
the
building,
Josh
Sydney
is
here
who
can
deal
with
engineering
and
technical
matters?
A
client,
a
tenant
called
burning
glass
has
a
lease
to
occupy
the
space
on
the
1st
of
October,
whose
lease
was
signed
a
long
time
ago,
they're
taking
the
entire
second
floor.
This
has
been
for
a
hundred
plus
years
in
office
building.
It
will
be
offices
once
again.
Needless
to
say,
no
electrical
service,
no
certificate
of
occupancy
tenants
cannot
move
in
and
that's
why
this
is
a
matter
which
does
not
admit
of
delay.
G
Meanwhile,
pursuant
to
the
existing
service,
the
trout
house
remains
in
operation,
Boston,
harbor
cruises
and
Liberty
schooners
have
been
there
for
many
many
years
and
continue.
So
the
council
has
to
report
this
out.
It
has
to
be
sent
to
the
State
House
sent
upon
Cory
as
a
courtesy,
we'll
file
it
in
the
Senate.
G
It's
already
been
pre
reviewed
by
Senate
Council.
They
will
review
whatever
is
comes
from
City
Hall.
They
may
do
some
technical
tweaks,
but
not
substantive,
not
substantive
matters,
and
that
requires
a
two-thirds
roll
call
vote
of
both
houses.
At
that
point,
provided
that
the
easement
documents
have
been
signed
by
the
three
utilities
with
the
owner
of
the
real-estate
name
of
the
B
RA
and.
E
G
Trying
to
be
objective
here,
because,
obviously
my
interest
is
that
of
the
client
I-
think
it's
fair
to
say
that
most
anybody
who's
lived
in
Boston
over
the
last
hundred
years
assumes
they'll
have
electrical
service
and
maybe
for
the
last
75
or
so
years.
Most
people
have
assumed
they
have
access
to
telephone
service
and
maybe
for
the
last
25
years
for
cable
and
internet
service,
and
the
folks
who
are
moving
into
this
building
need
electrical
service
and
that's
why
we're
here
very.
A
G
A
A
F
Don't
believe
so
it's
a
standard
utility
kind
of
connector.
You
know
once
it's
said
it
can
be
accessed.
New
lines
can
be
put
down,
but
it's
really
just
sending
the
the
easement
right-of-way.
If
you
go
out
to
the
site.
This
is
an
extension
of
State
Street.
So
State
Street
has
two
owners,
the
city
of
Boston
and
that
ends
right
about
in
front
of
the
Marriott
Long
Wharf,
but
and
then
the
BP
DA's
portion
goes
starting
at
the
Marriott
Hotel
towards
the
water's
edge.
A
And
then
just
drawing
from
the
public
testimony
we
had
some
folks.
In
the
north
hand,
he
would
sort
of
like
to
maybe
get
some
type
of
presentation
at
newer
and
not
sure
if
that's
something
that
can
be
done
relatively
quickly.
Also,
absolutely
we've
heard
from
Comcast
that
had
a
question
on
section
four
and
you
heard
that
testimony
is
there
any
thoughts
to
the
testimony
on
on
section
four
of
the
document.
F
We're
happy
to
present
the
sewer
we
benefit
from
knowing
the
right-of-way.
If
you
just
look
at
the
legislation,
you
don't
know
what
is
happening.
You
know
is
this
under
the
true
park
space
or
is
it
a
roadway
so
we're
happy
to
do
that?
The
project
at
the
custom-house
block
building
is
a
pretty
extensive
project,
but
it's
an
existing
renovation
of
existing
building,
so
I
don't
know
if
it
was
ever
put
before
newer
or.
F
A
H
G
H
H
F
H
G
H
G
H
A
I
I
A
H
G
H
Okay,
so
that
you
do
not
have
plans,
and
my
and
I
appreciate
the
historical
background
explaining
how
the
process
has
changed
and
also
explaining
how
do
the
lawsuit,
a
different
hurdle
or
a
different
step
has
also
been
added.
I
might
also
add
to
that
conversation
that
consistently,
at
least
it
throughout
my
the
neighborhood's
that
I
represent
the
process
also
involves
we
do
a
lot
of
back
and
forth
with
the
community
and
and
well
in
advance
notice
of
understanding.
H
What's
going
on,
because
I
I
mean
on
its
on
its
face
and
the
way
you
described
it,
it's
see.
It
strikes
me
as
just
updating
electrical
things,
a
very
simple
thing,
but
it
seems
like
we
got
to
the
end
result
before
we
got
through
the
process.
Right
and
I
would
have
loved
to
have
seen
that
simple
conversation
and
the
way
you
eloquently
described,
what's
going
on
presented
it
both
new
Nick
and
Noura,
just
to
at
least
inform
the
community
I'm
informed
by
my
community
about
their
thoughts
on
things.
H
I
also
understand
that,
as
the
excuse
me,
as
the
owner
of
the
property
Libby
PD,
a
br
a
will
be
compensated
for
this
use
of
this
easement.
But
part
of
the
conversation
is
also
how
the
community
itself
has
received
some
form
of
mitigation
or
seems
receive
some
form
of
benefits
as
well.
That
I,
you
know
as
a
conversation,
that's
open,
that's
transparent
and
that's
it
back
and
forth.
H
G
Respectfully
counselor
this
is
a
matter
of
which
is
more
urgent
than
most
that
come
before
you
until
June
of
July
forget
the
exact
date.
Nobody
had
told
the
owner
of
the
property
that
these
steps
were
necessary
and
we've
been
back
and
forth
between
the
State,
House
and
City
Hall.
Ever
since
I
think
that
mr.
McGinnis
had
stated
that
they're
prepared
to
make
a
presentation
to
the
two
separate
neighborhood
groups
and
our
team
could
certainly
go
along.
We
would
hope
it
could
get
through
the
council
and
get
up
to
the
legislature.
G
We
will
take
a
number
of
weeks
for
discussion
by
both
houses
there
again
they
don't
do
not
the
session
that
often
so
it's
fair
to
get
a
roll
call.
We
certainly
can
get
the
meetings
and
before
then
we
would
hope
the
council
could
send
it
up
there
and
certainly
representative
Michael
wits
and
Senator
Vaughn
Cory,
listen
to
the
same
constituents
as
the
folks
in
this
building.
Do.
I
Josh
was
Sydney
again.
The
city
of
Boston
implements
a
moratorium
of
excavation
of
public
streets
starting
November
15th.
So
if
we
don't
have
the
ability
to
implement
this
new
electrical
service
before
then
will
most
likely
be
cut
off
until
April
15th
of
next
year.
So
we
don't
have
a
problem
with
meeting
with
the
community,
but
where,
if
we
let
that
process
play
itself
out,
we
might
be
cut
off
which
building
one
get
a
new
permanent
service.
H
Know
I'm
the
community
groups
meet
once
a
month,
so
you
may
even
meet
possibly
October's
or
I,
don't
know
September's
and
you
can
get
on
the
agenda
and
make
the
presentation
so
I'm
not
hearing
I'm,
not
hearing
an
inability
to
go
through
the
process.
I
understand
the
pressing
nests
of
their
November
15th
deadline,
but
I
think
we're
all
saying
the
same
thing,
and
so
the
community
groups
are
both
here
represented
by
folks.
Nunik
is
behind
you
and
you
have
new
over
here.
H
You
can
get
on
their
agendas
present
before
them,
hopefully
with
the
plans
and
I.
Think
that
that's
gonna
be
something
that
is
an
issue
if
you
don't,
if
you're
presenting
with
no
plans,
you
should
have
that
your
letter
from
the
MPs
and
just
go
out
there
and
talk
directly
to
folks
and
I
think
it's
as
for
many
folks.
It's
just
a
matter
of
respect
and
understanding
of
what's
happening,
informing
them
and
then
moving
on.
So.
I
A
You
either
those
organizations
have
the
ability,
through
executive
session
or
through
an
expedited
or
emergency
meeting,
given
the
situation
that
we're
hearing
about
now
with
respect
to
certificate
of
occupancy
in
the
street,
potentially
closing
for
utility
services,
that's
something
that
would
move
the
executive
boards
to
maybe
call
for
some
type
of
executive.
A
special
session
just
trying
to
play
this
out.
I
A
I
Also,
we
need
the
these
easements
approves
and
get
the
conduits
group
scheduled
from
all
the
utility
companies
and,
as
you
know,
these
things
don't
happen
overnight
and
I'm
very,
very
concerned
that
if
we
don't
expedite
this
community
outreach,
the
building
isn't
gonna
be
able
to
been
officially
occupy.
The
building
I.
H
Think
what
I
wanted
to
wear
my
confusion
is
is
even
if
these
were
expedited
and
you
had
your
meetings
and
they
got
through
this
house.
I,
don't
do
you,
you
have
a
guarantee.
It's
gonna,
get
to
the
Statehouse
by
November
I
mean
that
that's
an
issue
that
you
would
have
period,
even
if
we're
moving
fast
I,
don't
know
that
either.
My
colleagues
and
my
delegation,
my
my
rep,
Michael
wits
or
senator
bond
kori,
would
be
able
to
get
it
through
both
houses.
This
fast
I
mean
they
have
thousands,
if
not
hundreds
of
bills.
H
Right
now
and
I
understand
the
urgency
that
you
feel
about
this
particular
issue
and
this
particular
home
rule,
but
there's
a
lot
of
other
things
in
line
that
are
equally
urgent,
that
impact
the
entire
state.
So
I
I'm
I'm
questioning
honestly
that
that
you
could
get
through
both
chambers
of
the
state
house
in
what
three
weeks
from.
G
My
conversations
with
senators
staff
and
the
representative
staff
as
soon
as
the
bill
is
up
they'll
they'll
get
moving
on
it
quickly,
they're.
They
are
aware
of
the
time
constraints
involved
and
they
are
in
session.
You
know
in
the
even-numbered
years
they're
out
of
session
31st
day.
They
are
back
in
session
now
they're
having
formals
once
sometimes
twice
a
week
up.
There.
I
Penalties
and
there's
there's
deadlines
and
right
now
we
don't
have
the
power
to
accommodate
full
tenant
moving
into
the
building.
It's
a
it's
a
major
issue
for
our
client
and
it
has
nothing
to
do
it.
Then
they're
tied
up
with
a
lawsuit
between
the
city
and
the
federal
government
about
who
owns
the
property
it
has
that
is
dragged
into
it.
Unfortunately,
what
we're
trying
to
do
the
best
we
can
with
situations
like
them
to
the
extent
we
can
expedite
whatever
community
involvement
we
have
to
do
whatever
drawings.
J
I
Yeah
the
streets
called
old
Atlantic
Wharf,
not
not
the
State
Street
intersection
and
it's
a
straight
shot
from
there
down
to
the
building
and
it
turns
into
the
custom-house
block
it's
about
300
feet
of
of
a
duck
bank
and
there's
manholes
there
now
are
there
services
there
now,
there's
not
large
enough
to
accommodate
a
21st
century
renovated
office,
building
and
there's
as
rich
mentioned.
Previously,
there
is
water
mains
sewer
mains
existing
tell
data
infrastructure
are
already
in
place
that
that
Street
is
a
hornet's
nest
of
subsurface
easements
already,
but.
I
It
really
all
depends
on
b/w
in
the
parks
department,
the
city.
Typically,
they
don't
like
doing
that
I.
It
would
have
to
be
a
conversation
with
them
to
say.
Is
there
a
leniency
to
do
this
during
the
winter?
But
at
that
point,
if
it
lasts
that
long
our
clients
in
a
very
difficult
position,
they
can't
they
can't
perform
on
what
they.
I
Of
next
month,
so
we've
been,
we've
been
dealing
with
this
for
years
with
the
executive
office
of
environmental
affairs
in
the
Park
Service,
because
this
is
a
store
of
tax
project
and
we
got
approvals
which
I'd
escaped
your
staff
from
two
years
ago.
Saying
this
all
can
be
approved.
We
have
a
plan
showing
all
the
new
utilities.
We
showed
scaffolding
around
the
building.
I
I
For
a
lack
of
planning
on
our
part,
the
state
liaison
to
the
Park
Service,
mentioned
to
the
BPD
a
that
we
have
to
get
this
special
state
legislation
approved
when
all
the
paperwork
is
there
and
we
were
as
surprised
as
anyone
that
we
were
required
to
do.
This.
I
mean
the
owner
of
the
building,
went
through
great
stakes
to
accommodate
for
not
having
a
transformer
outside
whether
it's
on
the
pad,
not
the
transformer,
a
transformer
and
closure.
And
finally,
they
just
gave
up
and
said
well,
we'll
put
it
in
the
building.
I
Before
count
per
floor
it
depends
oppose
subdivided
off,
but
right
now
there's
3
existing
tenants.
On
the
first
floor.
One
is
a
prep
kitchen
for
the
chart
house.
One
is
loss.
Harbor
cruises
one
is
Liberty
tall
ships
that
are
all
chapter
91
marine
based
tenants,
which
is
very
important
to
our
client
into
the
city.
Obviously,
and
then
the
occupant
count
per
floor,
I,
don't
know
if
the
thought
my
head
I
can
I
can
get
that
to
you.
I
It
we
have
no
problem.
Doing
community
outreach
community
involvement,
we
just
thought
a
subsurface
easement
would
be
sort
of
a
fate,
a
complete
based
on
on
prior
precedents,
but
if
these
these
community
groups
can
meet
with
us
sooner
we're
happy
to
do
it,
and
obviously
we
can't
control
when
the
state
sort
of
votes
on
this
and
all
that
stuff.
But
if
we
can't
control
meeting
sooner
expedite,
all
this
that
would
be
that'd
be
very
much
appreciated.
I.
J
Mean
I
think
the
outreach
is
on
you.
You,
you
have
one
group,
that's
that's
willing
to
meet
with
you.
I
wouldn't
meet
with
him
today.
I'm
sorry,
I,
don't
know
you
know,
sort
of
Brett
I
will
meet
with
Brent
today
and
see
if
he'll
have
a
special
meeting
and
you
invite
the
the
members
over
here
I
mean.
That's,
that's
that's
on
you
to
do
the
outreach
you
know
Brent
today
and
and
can
we
get?
Can
we
get
a
meeting
together
this
week
next
week,
and
so
that
would
be
my
suggestion?
J
H
This
particular
point:
if
Noura
is
comfortable
with
that
and
they're
going
to
do
that,
then
I
can
respect
that,
but
it
is,
they
do
put
I
want
you
to
know.
Noura
doesn't
set
up
this
thing
to
be
an
inconvenience
to
folks
they've
been
meeting
regularly.
They
have
pre
meetings
they
come
in
and
they
do
a
lot
of
work
to
make
sure
that
they
can
move
projects
as
efficiently
as
possible.
H
They're
all
volunteers,
so
you
know
to
ask
and
move
and
have
folks
come
in
an
addition
for
a
project
is
also
you
know,
a
special
favor
to
ask
of
them
as
well.
So
I
wanted
to
acknowledge
that
this
is
not
an
intent
to
be
in
the
way,
it's
literally
how
all
the
projects
are
done
and
in
the
North
End
at
least
the
parts
that
I
represent.
H
Is
that
folks
go
before
both
of
the
community
meetings
with
plans
with
the
answer
all
questions
and
then
I
get
a
response
from
the
community
meeting
from
the
organization
saying
no
problem.
We
have
the
following
problems:
we
don't
support,
and
so
that's
the
process
that
also
you're
entering
into
by
virtue
of
being
in
developing.
In
this
community,
and
so
I
want
to
respect
that
process
and
I
will
allow
for
them
to
change
that
process
as
they
need
to
they
have
bylaws.
H
D
Just
like
to
point
out
that
I'm,
not
an
officer
of
Nara
and
I'm,
not
here
in
that
capacity
I'm
here
as
a
private
citizen
who
was
involved
with
Long
Wharf
over
many
years,
Victor
is
the
chair
of
our
zlc.
He
can
certainly
get
this
before
that
committee
very
quickly.
But
again
we
can't
speak
for
the
organization.
Had
we
known
that
that
would
be
the
request.
We
could
have
tried
to
get
some
officers
here
to
see
what
they
would
say,
but
I
would
just
like
to.
D
D
There's
no
litigation
I
mean
that's
long
since
over
long
since
known,
as
attorney
dakara
has
pointed
out,
he's
been
working
on
this
over
the
summer,
working
with
the
the
state
representative,
which
is
actually
not
the
National
Park
Service,
but
a
local
representative
who
doesn't
necessarily
speak
for
the
NPS,
but
working
with
them,
working
with
Senate
counsel
and
I
guess
I
have
to
ask:
why
was
no
one
working
with
the
neighborhood's?
They
certainly
knew
we
existed.
They
knew
we
were
there,
they
knew
our
process.
D
D
Yes,
certain
people
within
the
legislature
may
have
indicated
that
they'll
expedite
certain
things,
but
whether
that
will
happen
within
the
very
tight
time
frame,
especially
finding
out
that
there
aren't
even
any
plans
for
anyone
to
look
at
it's
just
a
little
concerning
I,
just
kind
of
feel
like
something
is
kind
of
being
pushed
through.
That,
maybe
is
fine,
and
maybe
it's
not
I
just
don't
know.
Thank
you.
I
That
was
sort
of
my
previous
thought.
We're
not
trying
to
this
isn't
gamesmanship
we're
trying
to
do
the
right
thing.
I,
honestly,
didn't
think
that
we
had
to
reach
out
to
community
groups
to
install
a
low-grade
electrical
service.
I.
Just
that's
my
fault,
that's
my
fault
than
I
apologize,
very
good!
Thank
you.
Anyone.
A
Else
here
wishing
to
offer
public
testimony,
they
do
so
now,
if
I
hold
your
piece
seeing
and
hearing
no
additional
desire
for
public
testimony
that
closes
the
public
testimony
any
my
colleagues
have
any
comments.
Final
thoughts,
oh
I
mean
it's
clear.
There's
enough
here,
we
kind
of
get
the
sort
of
the
urgency
of
the
situation.
A
Our
hope
is
that
before
folks
leave
this
chamber,
they
can
have
some
conversations
with
a
couple
of
the
community
groups
to
see
if
we
can
try
to
resolve
at
least
the
community
process
piece
of
it
before
the
council
takes
formal
action.
Obviously
we
don't
want
to
see
tenants
and
other
folks
dislocated
and
litigation
and
suing
and
all
that
stuff
so
I
see.
A
So
with
that,
if
there's
no
additional
testimony
with
respect
to
dark
it,
1
to
64
message,
an
order
approving
homo
petition
to
the
general
court
entitled
and
act
authorizing
the
Boston
Redevelopment
Authority
to
grant
easements
for
utility
purposes
over
a
portion
of
a
certain
parcel
of
land
located
in
the
city
of
Boston
that
was
sponsored
by
Mayor
montre
we're
also
the
Committee
on
Governor
patience
is
adjourned.
Thank
you.