►
From YouTube: Army Corps 3x3 Advisory Committee 1/26/22
Description
Army Corps 3x3 Advisory Committee 1/26/22
B
I
think
we
have
enough
members
here.
I
think
the
chair
will
be
on
shortly,
so
I
think
he
was
just
gonna,
give
an
update,
maybe
about
our
meetings,
but
we're
already
at
a
monthly.
So
I
think
in
in
use
of
time,
they'll
just
take
it
over
to
you
and
then,
when
the
chairman's
ready
to
add
anything
we'll
we'll.
Let
him
go
that
works
for
everybody.
C
C
We
didn't
really
have
anything
to
report
in
the
christmas
right
after
the
christmas
break,
a
couple
things
to
discuss
this
morning,
the
largest
of
which
the
most
looming
of
which
is
the
document
that
I
sent
to
you
think,
monday
afternoon
or
tuesday
morning.
It's
a
bit
of
a
blur
when
I
sent
that
out,
but
anyway,
very
important
summary
preview
of
the
recommended
plan
that
the
army
corps
has
continued
to
work
on.
I
encouraged
you
all
to
digest.
C
It
will
be
no
secret
to
you
that
I
worked
carefully
with
the
army
corps
engineers
to
make
sure
that
they
put
sufficient
information
there
for
for
everyone,
primarily
council,
but
for
anyone
this
is
a
public
document.
It
is
posted
on
the
army
corps
website.
I
think
as
a
monday
afternoon.
So
it
is
there
again.
If
you
haven't
read
it,
I
encourage
you
to
read
it.
C
The
corvette
core
of
engineers
did
this
together
with
with
the
port.
This
was
something
that
we
all
knew
needed
to
be
done.
The
corps
interrupted
their
process
to
do
this
in
between
the
feasibilities
phase
and
the
final
report.
They
normally
don't
do
those
things,
but
they
did
here
because
they
saw
it's
important.
C
I
think
they
understood
very
clearly
the
messages
that
the
port
was
saying,
and
we
are
delighted
that
the
disalignment
has
been
changed
this
way.
It
creates
an
additional
problem
to
the
northern
part
of
it,
and
we
can
talk
about
that
or
an
additional
challenge
in
ped,
but
we
can
talk
about
that.
I
think
some
of
the
most
important
things
here
are
the
process
clarifications
that
the
corps
has
has
provided.
C
You
will
see
that
they
need
a
letter
of
support
and
the
self-certification
from
the
mayor
from
the
city
before
they
can
before
the
district
here
in
charleston
can
finalize
their
version
of
the
report
and
send
it
up
between
for
technical
and
policy
compliance
and
review,
so
that
that
is
something
that
the
mayor
is
going
to
have
to
consider
to
do.
And
how
he's
going
to
do
that
with
council
is
important.
What
happens
then?
C
C
We
knew
this
was
going
to
happen
because
you
have
a
more
simpler
construction
estimate.
Taking
this
the
structure
off
of
east
bay
and
morrison,
I
mean
you
have
a
more
rational
alignment
which
provides
cost
savings
and
you
also
are
protecting
a
little
more
land
and
you'll
have
fewer
impacts
upon
historic
and
cultural
assets
along
the
east
side.
C
So
that's
an
important
improvement
in
the
big
scheme
of
things
for
those
of
you
who
don't
work
in
this
realm,
the
difference
between
a
10.2
and
11.3
bcr
is
important,
but
because
we
are
10.2
was
already
one
of
the
highest
or
the
highest
in
the
nation
of
a
project
of
this
kind.
It's
not
going
to
make
any
difference.
If
congress
would
would
review
this,
it
is
likely
to
be
funded
for
forped
once
thinking,
support
and
understand.
C
C
The
standard
boilerplate
that
becomes
the
foundation
of
any
of
any
design
agreement
that
the
core
of
engineers
is
going
to
do
be
aware
that
I
am
in
touch
with
the
norfolk
district
with
sorry
the
city
of
norfolk,
who
is
in
ped
with
the
army
corps
of
engineers,
the
city
of
norfolk
signed
a
the
blank,
not
the
blank,
but
the
boilerplate
design
agreement.
They
made
no
changes
to
it
because
they
assumed
they
would
be
able
to
make
alignment,
changes
and
design
changes
and
all
those
other
things
amendments
improvements
in
ped.
C
That
is,
in
fact
what
is
happening.
I
encourage
any
of
you
to
want
to
talk
with
the
folks
up
in
norfolk
to
do
that.
You
see
army
corps
providing
a
lot
of
design,
flexibility
and
alignment
flexibility
as
they
move
through
pad.
They
have
a
complex
alignment
too.
Their
structure
is
four
separate,
non-linked
components
in
various
parts
of
the
city,
but
the
most
important
part
in
some
ways
is
the
downtown
area.
C
C
C
We
have
verbally
communicated
this
the
mayor
and
I
we
have
verbally
communicated
this
to
the
folks
in
the
army
corps
of
engineers
to
general
kelly
at
the
the
division
to
colonel
johannes
here
at
the
district.
We
are
preparing
a
letter
and
I'm
happy
to
describe
what's
in
that
letter.
If
you
have
questions
about
it
to
the
army
corps
of
engineers
in
the
next
couple
of
days,
the
letter
has
been
drafted
for
a
week
or
ten
days
and
just
refining
it
now
waiting
for
the
mayor's
final
signature.
C
So
it's
ready
to
go
and
there
you'll
see
exactly
what
we
want
to
put
in
this.
These
are
things
again
like
I
said.
None
of
this
will
surprise
you,
except
maybe
some
of
the
technical
analysis,
things
and
I'm
happy
to
discuss
that
important
to
state
that
if
the
army
corps
engineers
does
not
get
the
letter
of
support
and
the
financial
self-certification
from
the
city,
it
is
unlikely
to
go
up
through
the
chain
of
command.
C
The
danger
with
not
having
that
chief
report
is
that,
if
anything
would
happen
to
the
city
going
forward
with
a
with
a
bad
storm
and
the
city
decided
hey,
we
want
to.
We
want
to
consider
some
sort
of
surgeries
mitigation
10
years
from
now
15
years.
From
now
five
years
from
now
with
the
army,
poor
engineers,
we
would
have
to
complete
an
entirely
new
three
by
three
by
three.
C
So
we
we
at
least
in
my
at
least,
want
to
try
to
get
to
the
level
of
achieve
support
so
that,
even
if
we
don't
move
into
ped
or
we
can't
negotiate
a
solid
design
agreement
with
the
army
corps
of
engineers
that
we
would
have
the
chief
report.
So
we
wouldn't
have
to
wait
again
for
another
three
by
three
by
three,
which
takes
three
years
and
if
that's
three
years,
post
disaster
post
event
a
future
possible
event.
Then
I
think
you
know
we
would
be
further
behind
the
curve
and
trying
to
recover.
C
It's
important
to
note
that
there's
a
letter
in
this
there's
language
in
this
document
that
they're,
that
the
letter
of
support
and
the
self-certification
are
not
non-binding.
They
do
not
bind
the
city
to
anything.
It
is
the
design
agreement
that
the
city
would
negotiate
with
the
army
corps.
That
is
the
first
binding
mechanism
for
ped.
C
So
it's
important
to
understand
and
as
we
discussed
you
can
you
can
you
know
this
because
we've
discussed
it,
the
city
would
fund
ped
on
an
annual
basis
and
if
it
needed
to
pause,
funding
or
reduce
funding
for
ped
either
because
there
was
a
financial
reason
other
needs
in
the
city,
other
higher
needs
in
the
city
again,
a
recession
and
tax
revenues
are
down
or
whatever
or
because
we
are
unhappy
with
the
progress
of
the
project
in
pet.
The
city
could
fund
lower
or
not
fund
its
commitments
to
pet
in
any
given
year.
C
That
would
cause
the
study.
There
is
no
financial
penalty
for
pausing
the
study,
so
we
would
just
then
the
core
would
not
be
able
to
proceed
without
that
money
in
that
next
year.
So
there's
another
bit
of
a
safety
valve
there
and
then
one
final
thing
for
your
awareness
to
be
transparent,
and
I
see
in
my
little
hollywood
squares
box
here
mike
mike
seeking
councilman
seekings
is
on
the
phone.
C
I
sent
a
letter,
an
email
correspondence
to
all
city
council
members
over
the
weekend,
explaining
deciphering
this
army
corps
preview
document
that
they
sent
over
to
us
and
highlighting
some
key
components
there.
So
I
will
leave
it
at
that
and
see
if
you
have
any
questions
about
about
this
document
or
where
we
are.
B
D
Yeah
thanks
caitlin
dale
great
great
summary
in
observation.
I'm
not
sure
this
is
a
question,
but
can
you
comment
on
why
maybe
it
was-
and
I
you
know
this
is
the
same
point.
I
asked
you
to
clarify
for
the
cna
meeting.
Can
you
clarify
why
I
was
so
misinformed
I'll
just
take
responsibility
for
the
the
changing
interpretation
of
these
two
letters.
D
The
city
was
going
to
endorse
three
by
three
and
state
its
financial
wherewithal,
and
then
that
became
the
city's
endorsement
of
moving
into
ped
and
now
it's
to
complete
the
feasibility
section
before
and
then
there's
a
subsequent
couple
of
letters
to
move
into
ped
and
then
beyond
that
we
we
opine
on
the
final
final
final
design.
Is
that
accurate
and
there
it's
not
just
an
observation?
I
think
the
implication
is.
C
But
you
have
to
always
have
to
finish
the
study,
the
study,
the
final
report
and
I'm
going
to
clarify
not
the
recommended
plan,
but
the
final
report
is
not
is
not
created
until
the
chief
of
engineer
signs
it.
So
you
have
the
optimized
tentatively
selected
plan
as
modified,
which
becomes
the
recommended
plan,
and
the
recommended
plan
is
what
the
district
sends
up
the
chain
of
command
for
technical
and
policy
review
and
a
final
signature.
C
Once
that
signature
is
on
it.
It
becomes
the
final
environmental
impact
statement
and
final
report
that
congress
would
consider
for
funding
the
communication
from
the
army
corps
of
engineers,
and
it
was
a
misinterpretation
by
many.
It
is
clear
that
it
is
because
the
jargon
or
the
nature
of
how
the
army
corps
has
afforded
accorded
these
processes
these
internal
processes,
the
recommended
plan,
is
not
a
formal
update
to
the
plan.
C
The
final
plan,
for
instance,
this
major
realignment
on
the
port
properties,
hasn't
changed
the
optimized
plan.
We
just
have
the
new
map
and
we
have
the
new
sort
of
line
drawing
on
that,
but
it
it
doesn't
materially
impact
because
it
is
still
the
recommended
plan.
There
are
changes
underway.
We
are.
C
We
are
part
of
the
project
delivery,
kayla
and
I
are
part
of
the
project
delivery
team
calls
with
the
army
corps
of
engineers
every
two
weeks,
and
there
are
technical
experts
changing
words,
not
not
material
words,
but
changing
how
the
report
reads
because
they're
getting
comments
back
from
from
different
agencies.
Saying
what
about
this?
What
about
that
and
the
board
of
engineers
is
is
addressing
those
those
are
not
shared
with
everyone,
because
they're
they're?
It's
it's
just
how
you
refine
the
report.
C
So
there's
this
moment,
or
this
long
period
between
the
optimized
tentatively
selected
plan
and
the
final
report,
where
the
course
is
making
changes,
it
is
only
when
so
we
assumed
and
I'll
on
all
on
this.
We
assumed
that
the
city
was
going
to
be
presented
with
an
updated
recommended
plan
to
say
consider
this,
and
do
you
want
to
continue
moving
forward?
C
We
knew
that
they
had
to
complete
the
study
and
we
knew
we
needed
the
authorization
we
knew
we
needed
to
negotiate
a
design
agreement,
but
there
was
no
recommended
plan,
so
we
asked
the
city.
We
asked
the
corps
of
engineers
to
describe
the
changes
they
have
been
making
and
I'll
just
be
clear
here.
They
have
never
done
this
sort
of
executive.
C
Summary
of
changes
had
been
made
in
the
interim
before
they
had
a
good
clearance
to
do
that,
but
it
was
essential
for
us
for
them
to
communicate
to
us
us,
meaning
the
city
and
us,
meaning
you
all
and
us
meaning
the
stakeholders
and
citizens.
What
had
been
going
on
because
of
the
high
attention
paid
to
this.
So
there
is,
there
was
always
we
always
knew
that
the
letter
of
support
and
that
the
self-certification
were
non-binding.
C
D
B
E
I
think
he's
trying
to
get
to.
When
are
we
going
to
get
to
a
point
where
the
city's
going
to
be
asked
to
vote
to
move
this
into
pet,
and
I
had
the
exact
same
question:
I'm
going
to
frame
it
a
little
differently?
What
happens
now
between
assume
the
mayor
signs
his
letter
and
amy
signs?
Her
letter
goes
up
the
chain
what
happens
between
that
date
and
when
we
come
back
and
negotiate
the
design
agreement.
What
changes
in
this
report?
What
do
we
expect
as
a
city
to
happen.
C
The
corps
will
do
its
internal
technical
review
at
the
division
and
at
the
headquarters
level
the
chief
of
engineers
will
be
presented
with
a
document
confer
with
if
the
secretary
of
the
army
that
they
want
to
pursue
a
request
for
authorization
appropriation
to
step
into
pet,
that's
their
own
process.
They
will
then
submit
it
to
congress.
Congress
will
consider
it.
C
There
is
a
bill
that
they
do
every
two
years,
the
word
of
ill
water
resources,
development
act
that
is
due
for
consideration
this
summer.
The
corps
would
ask
for
funding
in
that
congress
would
either
provide
it
or
not.
If
congress
provides
the
funding,
they
will
tell
the
district
here
to
start
the
negotiation
on
the
design
agreement.
C
The
design
agreement
will
then
be
negotiated
between
the
city
and
the
army
corps
of
engineers
again,
and
we
will
add
things
into
that
design
agreement,
and
at
that
point
I
think
city
council
will
be
asked.
Are
you
comfortable
with
this
design
agreement,
because
it
is
at
that
point
you're
going
to
commit
the
funds
to
say
yes,
we're
comfortable
with
the
design
agreement,
and
thus
we
will
move
into
the
pet
process.
C
C
Third
quarter
of
2022,
they
are
because
it's
an
election
year,
they're
they're
likely
to
punt
final
consideration
of
these
bills
until
after
the
election
in
november
next
year,
and
then
they'll
finish
it
most
likely
in
december,
and
then
we
would
start
the
negotiation
on
the
design
agreement
and,
let
me
be
clear:
we
have
a
four-page
letter
three
and
a
half
page
letter
already.
You
know
it's
in
its
final
review,
we're
going
to
send
that
to
the
course
soon
about
what
we're
going
to
add
into
the
design
agreement.
C
If
we
don't
get
those
things
in
the
design
agreement,
it's
the
core
of
engineers
faults.
We
will
not
proceed
and
I'll
speak
on.
I've
heard
the
mayor
say
and
I'll
give
you
my
word
for
what
it's
worth
is.
If
the
coordinators
does
not
accept
these
things,
we
have
to
consider
carefully
what
we're
going
to
do,
but
I
think
they
will,
because
I
vetted
a
number
of
these
items
with
them
already,
and
these
are
all
things
that
could
be
done
in
ped
and
they
are
described
similarly
in
this
document
of
what
can
be
done
in
pay.
E
C
C
We
think
that,
with
the
final
report
that
is
going
to
come
from,
if,
if
we
get
the
final
report
from
the
chief
and
if
we
get
authorization
and
appropriation
from
congress
and
if
we
negotiate-
and
these
are
in
sequence,
if
we
negotiate
a
successful
design
agreement
at
that
point,
council
would
then
have
full
information
on
what
it's
what's
in
front
of
it.
And
what
is
not?
C
You
know
we
will
see
again
what
we
will
see
if
council
is
comfortable
with
those
things
that
are
in
the
design
agreement
and
again,
very
clearly,
I
can.
I
can
describe
the
things
we
have.
I
mean
we
know
the
realignment
of
the
port
as
as
important
as
it
is,
has
created
a
problem
on
johnson
street.
The
first
item
we
have
here
for
alignment
changes
is
on
johnson
street.
C
The
second
is
on
concord
street,
both
in
gatsboro,
as
well
as
in
the
french
quarter,
neighborhoods
both
for
the
facilities
that
are
outboard
of
the
alignment
as
well
as
for
facilities
that
are
in
theory,
within
the
line.
The
line
goes
up
concrete
street.
We
don't
know
if
that's
on
the
east
side
of
the
west
side
of
concord
street.
C
Those
are
the
kind
of
things
we're
going
to
pursue.
Lockwood
is
very
clear:
we
have
to
fix
that
alignment.
We
are
going
to
work
on
that.
We
are
not
going
to
accept
a
gate
across
lockwood
with
more
nature
based
features
there
are
there
are.
These
are
things
that
that
that
we
have
identified
more
attention
to
maybe
an
additional
level
of
protection
for
rosemont
and
bridger,
because
they
are
non-structural
that
you
know.
C
In
ped
to
say,
you
know
what,
because
those
are
non-structural,
those
are
elevations.
Maybe
we
need
to
give
them
14
feet
of
of
non-structural
protection,
which
would
in
essence
mean
flood-proofing
more
of
those
facilities.
So
these
are
things
we
will
do
in
bed.
There
are
a
number
of
very
technical
studies
that
occur
in
ped
for
wave
over
topping
waving
storm
water,
impalement
groundwater
flow
rooting
for
that
water
that
would
get
over
the
wall
in
case
the
storm
surge
was
13
feet.
C
How
you
integrate
that
the
the
pumps
that
the
core
of
engineers
are
going
to
build
to
move
that
water,
how
you
integrate
that
with
the
city's
drainage
system,
so
you
get
more
robustness
within
the
city's
drainage
system.
There's
a
lot
of
things,
a
lot
of
technical
studies
that
that
are
in
ped.
We
have
a
number
of
very
clear
ideas
of
things
we
want
to
do
once
the
mayor
sends
this
letter
and
I
think
that's
going
to
be
in
the
next
week.
It
could
be
in
the
next
few
days.
C
B
B
D
Yeah,
I
I
think
dale
would
be
super
useful
for
both
this
august
group,
but
also
just
the
general
citizenry
to
see
a
new
schematic
of
the
process
and
the
potential
timeline.
I
think
that
would
clarify
a
lot
of
the
the
words
that
have
just
gone
back
and
forth,
and
then
I
do.
I
do
have
another
question,
but
it's
not
part
of
this
thread
so
I'll
hold
off
on
that
thanks
great.
A
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
so
dale.
This
is
news
to
me
because
it
seems
a
little
different
than
what
we
were
told
so
unilaterally
when
you
say
the
city,
it's
not
including
council.
At
this
point
it's
just
the
city.
Basically,
your
office
and
the
mayor
will
be
even
though
it's
non-binding,
you'll
be
sending
a
letter
saying
get
this
up
to
congress.
A
C
So
I'm
going
to
speak
for
myself.
I
can't
I
don't
want
to
speak
for
the
mayor
here,
but
I'm
going
to
tell
you
what
I
what
how
I've
interpreted
things
that
I've
heard
about
this
okay,
so
this
is
dale
morris
speaking
as
someone
who's
in
the
middle
of
this.
I
am
not
speaking
for
the
mayor,
but
what
I
have
heard
is
for
the
last
year
and
a
half
council
has
been
told
it's
going
to
be
able
to
see
the
final
three
by
three
study
and
then
determine
whether
it
wants
to
move
into
pay.
C
Okay,
because
final
study
isn't
there
until
the
chief
of
engineers
signs
it
that
won't
be
until
may,
but
to
but
to
get
it
to
the
chief
of
engineers.
It
requires
a
non-binding
letter
of
support
and
non-binding
letter
of
self
self
financial
self-certification
to
be
included
in
the
district's
report
up
the
chain
of
command
to
eventually
get
to
the
chief.
C
C
So
if
the
mayor
doesn't
send
this
letter,
the
study
it's
likely
not
to
get
to
the
chief
and
thus
the
study
will
be
terminated,
so
all
this
effort
will
be
will
be
gone
and
we
if
we
decide
to
do
something
else,
because
we
get
hit
with
a
storm
or
we
decide
in
two
years.
You
know.
Maybe
we
should
do
this.
C
If
there
is
a
non-willing
local,
sponsor
non-federal,
sponsor
that
chief
of
engineers
is
probably
going
to
recommend
to
terminate
the
study.
Okay,
he
could
recommend
deposit
he's
likely
to
recommend
to
terminate
it
okay.
So
the
mayor
is
again
dale,
moore
speaking,
the
mayor
is:
we've
discussed
this.
The
mayor
has
indicated
in
my
interpretation
that
look
council
needs
to
have
the
ability
to
see
the
final
report,
but
we
need
to
get
that
far.
We
need
to
signal
the
city's
willingness
to
complete
the
study.
C
C
Let's
complete
the
study,
let's
get
a
cheese
report,
let's
see
if
we
get
funding
or
the
core
gets
funding,
and
then
let's
negotiate
a
design
agreement
and
once
that
is
done,
then
let's
have
council
weigh
in
formally
on
it
because
they're
going
to
have
to
be
asked
to
spend
the
money.
So
that's
how
this
process
is
working
working
forward.
So
does
that
answer
your
question
dan?
It
does.
A
C
It's
surprised,
sorry
to
interrupt
you,
it
surprised
katelyn
and
I,
when
we
were
on
the
phone
with
the
army
corps
engineers.
When
are
you
going
to
send
us
the
recommended
plan
and
they
said
what
recommended
plans?
The
recommended
plan
that
you
have
on
your
slides?
Well,
that's
just
the
tsp
as
we've
refined
it.
So
there
has
been
a
number
of
conversations,
often
tense
between
us
and
the
core
constructive
but
tense
about
the
the
the
way
the
core
of
engineers
does
it.
You
know,
works
through
its
processes
pursuant
to
federal
policy.
C
A
C
D
A
C
The
letter
of
support
self-certification
needs
to
be
provided
pretty
soon,
so
they
can.
The
district
here
can
complete
their
work
and
send
it
up
goes
through
three
or
four
months
of
review.
Chief
gets
it
chief
signs,
it
congress
authorizes,
appropriates
district
contacts,
the
city
say:
hey,
we
have
our
money,
we
need
to
negotiate
a
design
agreement.
C
We
negotiate
that
if
that's
successful,
then
we
present
it
to
council
because
it's
going
to
be
okay,
we
need
some
money
now
to
start
to
start
the
pet
pursuant
to
the
design
agreement
that
at
that
moment,
that
is
when
council
is
going
to
be
asked
and
again
I
don't
think
the
word
a
bill
is
going
to
be
passed.
I
mean
I
could
be
wrong,
they
could
do
it
quickly.
You
get
a
bad
disaster
this
summer,
somewhere
in
the
gulf
or
somewhere
on
the
east
coast.
C
Congress
will
push
that
word
a
bill
they'll
make
it
the
number
one
priority
to
push
it
through
and
it
could
be
done
in
august.
My
gut
is
without
a
disaster,
it's
going
to
be
done
in
november
or
december.
It's
only
then
that
we
will
negotiate
the
design
agreement,
but
because
we're
signaling
these
things
already
to
them,
what
we
want
in
it
and
because
these
are
all
within
the
authority
of
the
corps
of
engineers
to
do.
C
We
don't
anticipate
that
design
agreement
negotiation
to
be
tricky.
What
I
will
tell
you
is
anecdotally:
we
know
that,
because
we
are
not
going
to
sign
the
boilerplate,
the
standard
contract
for
design
agreement
because
we
will
amend
it.
We
know
it's
going
to
take
either
the
division
or
the
headquarters
to
agree
to
that,
and
in
my
opinion,
that
is
perfectly
fine.
C
My
my
own
personal
arrogance
here
is
that
we
have
said
all
along
we're
going
to
make
this
process
so
good
that
it's
going
to
help
the
core
better
overall
and
if
we
can
start
to
show
other
people
how
you
work
through
the
design
agreement
to
get
what
you
need
to
improve
this
process.
Well,
I
think
that's
something
we
should
do.
C
I
have
no
problem
whatsoever
asking
that
the
assistant
secretary
of
the
army
and
the
chief
of
engineers
to
sign
a
really
robust
design
agreement,
because
without
it,
where
are
we,
we
need
to
do
things
differently
here
we're
going
to
try
to
do
that.
So
that's
that's
my
opinion,
but
that's
where
we
are
so
I
look
at
it.
C
B
A
B
C
Yeah,
so
the
gates,
so
the
title
gates
are
across
the
major
water
bodies.
So
there's
two
of
them
up
in
newmarket,
creek.
Sorry,
there's
two
of
them
up
in
wagner
terrace,
one
by
the
citadel
there's
going
to
be
a
title
gate
at
long
lake.
You
know
at
the
bottom
of
the
medical
district
there
is
likely
to
be
one
perhaps
by
the
coast
guard
station
that
is
still
tbd.
It
depends
on
exactly
where
that
line
goes,
there's
a
tidal
gate
up
in
newmarket
creek.
C
Those
are
the
tidal
gates.
Those
have
to
be
there
because
you're
going
to
impound
water
and
they
have
to
let
that
out
and
because
of
the
environmental
conditions
in
those
watersheds.
You
have
to
make
sure
that
when
the
storm
is
not
around
so
364
days
a
year,
the
water
is
flowing,
the
tidal
water
is
flowing
in
and
out
as
a
normal
thing.
That's
just
that's
just
there,
the
actual
railroad
gates
and
road
crossing
gates
and
that
they're
not
they're.
We
haven't
designed
any
of
that.
That's
what
you
do
in
ted
and
very
clearly.
C
C
Now
that
doesn't
necessarily
when
we
get
a
design.
Maybe
we
want
to
reduce
the
number
of
gates
when
we
do,
because
each
gate
is
a
risk
factor,
that's
anywhere.
So
we
want
to
rationalize
that,
but
that's
what
we
would
do
in
head
again.
You
can't
design
the
gate
until
you
know
exactly
where
the
wall
is
going
and
exactly
how
it
interfaces
with
that
neighborhood
or
that
street.
So
that's
how
you
that's
what
you
do
in
pay.
Does
that
help?
Does
that
help
answer
your
question.
C
Dennis
well,
no,
but
I'll.
Just
I'll
tell
you
this
for
the
medical
district,
we
are
not
going
to
accept
right
in
the
in
the
optimized
alignment.
There
are
there's
a
the
structure
would
come
up
the
the
west
side
of
lockwood
across
lockwood,
just
south
of
the
james,
I'm
james
ivey
connector,
and
either
go
under
the
connector
or
go
across
calhoun
and
then
come
back
underneath
south
of
the
va
parking
facility
cross
lockwood
again
somewhere
somewhere
between
calhoun
and
b.
C
We're
not
gonna
we're
just
not
accepting
that.
The
gore
already
knows
that
that
is
unwise.
That
is
an
important
transportation
corridor.
It
is
an
irrational
alignment.
They
know
that
they
have
acknowledged
that
to
us.
They
acknowledge
that
to
the
to
the
discovery,
the
wagon
ball
team
last
year,
but
because
they
couldn't
do
borings
under
the
james
island
connector
in
the
in
the
feasibility
study,
they're,
not
sure
that
they
can
construct
under
the
james
island
connector,
but
they
would
look
at
that
in
ped.
C
We
will
not
accept
an
impairment
of
the
of
the
lockwood
corridor.
We
know
that
we
can
get
that
out
on
the
western
side
of
loch
recorder
for
the
entire,
the
entire
alignment,
what
the
structure
does
north
and
west
of
the
ashley
river
bridges.
That
is
something
that
we
consider,
because
that's
going
to
impact
bristol
condominiums
as
well
as
brittlebank.
That's
something
we
design
more
carefully
in
ted,
but
for
those
gates
on
on
lockwood
and
prospect.
B
B
D
Thanks
again,
I
think
we've
had
we've
all
had
a
couple
of
months
now
to
you
know,
process
and
synthesize,
and
something
that's
been.
I've
been
stewing
on
struggling
with.
One
of
the
elephants
in
the
room
is
obviously
the
political
aspects
of
this
project.
Second,
one
is
the
financing
aspects,
given
that
this
is
one
element
in
an
overall,
unwelcome
water
management.
D
I
think
we
all
understand
that
calhoun
west
is
compelling
is
critical
to
the
peninsula.
The
musical
question
is:
why
hasn't
that
been
funded
by
by
the
city
and
how
does
the
calculus
change
once
we've
entered
the
real
strokes
of
three
by
three
to
allow
other
water
management
projects,
let
alone
a
critical
one,
like
calhoun
west?
D
D
C
So
I'm
gonna
I'm
gonna
answer
and
then
I
would
ask
either
councilman
wearing
I.
I
don't
have
the
full
hollywood
squares
up
or
councilman
seeking
to
reflect
upon
this,
because
I
can't
I
can
and
don't
speak
for
counsel
either
narrowly
or
broadly
calhoun
west.
As
I
understand
it,
you
know
before
my
time.
As
I
understand
it,
this
is
an
important
component
of
peninsula
interior
water
management,
mostly
storm
water,
but
also
some
tidal
it
piggybacks
off
of
calhoun,
east
or
concord
and
spring
fishburn,
which
are
completed
and
near
completion.
C
There
was
a
high
level
study
done.
I've
spoken
with
the
folks
who
did
that
study.
More
study
is
needed
for
clear
it
is.
It
is
not
ready
to
go.
It
is
not
an
engineered
project,
it
is
a
conceptual
design
of
what's
possible,
so
more
money
would
have
to
be
spent
on
the
full
engineering
and
then
construction.
C
That's
the
next
phase
of
the
project.
I
don't
know
what
the
cost
of
the
calhoun
west
preliminary
engineering
study
was,
but
I
think
that
was
probably
three
to
five
million
dollars.
I
don't
know
six
million.
That
said,
pardon
me
mike
six,
six,
okay.
So
that
said,
let's
think
about
calhoun
west,
the
need
for
calvin
west.
C
It's
essential
we're
in
the
city
of
limited
resources,
but
it
is
essential
with
a
perimeter
around
with
a
hard
edge
around
the
perimeter,
either
with
a
knee
wall,
as
we
discussed
before
you're
going
to
need
some
sort
of
hard
edge
around
the
peninsula.
So
what
the
dutch
dialogue
said
is
what
everyone
knows:
you're
gonna
need
some
sort
of
edge
with
a
knee
wall
or
with
an
army
coordinator
surge
wall.
C
The
demands
upon
calhoun
west
change.
They
get
less
simply
because
you'll
have
less
of
a
tidal
impact
upon
the
lower
parts
of
the
calhoun
west
basin.
When
that
becomes
the
case,
your
pipe
sizes
changes
your
pumps,
change
and
things
like
that.
So
it
is
with
that
harder
edge.
You're
likely
to
get
a
lower
calhoun
west
cost
substantially
lower.
C
B
C
Creates
a
wall
between
the
river
and
the
city
that
is
going
to
be
absolutely
necessary,
so
we've
discussed
this
before,
but
why
so?
That's
that's
crucial.
Calhoun
west
is
important
and
I
don't
deny
it
and
I
would
support
any
move
towards
that.
But
why
counsel
hasn't
considered
this,
I
don't
know
I
can't
answer.
I
can't
speak
for
counsel.
So
if
someone
wants
to
try
that
I'm
I'm
happy
to
listen
again,
there
are
limited
resources.
That's
that's
what
I
assume.
E
Yeah
sure
not
going
to
go
too
deep
into
it,
but
I
actually
talked
to
the
team.
That's
been
working
on
it
off
on
calhoun
west
this
week,
so
calhoun
west.
As
you
all
know,
it's
no
secret
is
to
me
the
most
important
project
out
there
that
isn't
funded
designed
or
built.
We
did
have
a
flurry
of
activity
and
preliminary
design
of
that
project
about
five
years
ago.
With
davidson
floyd,
we
spent
a
whole
bunch
of
money
on
it
and
it's
been
put
on
the
shelf.
E
I
can't
tell
you
all
the
reasons
why
currently
it's
on
the
shelf,
but
it
needs
to
come
off.
There
are
a
few
of
them,
one
of
which
has
been
a
hyper
focus
on
the
three
by
three
and
dale
explained.
I
think
in
some
ways
that
the
two
will
need
to
be
integrated
if
three
by
three
goes
forward.
I
agree
with
that.
We
need
an
integrated
study.
The
other
problem
is,
we
have
not
had
and
this
committee,
the
first
thing
it
did
was
demand
a
comprehensive
water
management
plan
for
the
city
of
charleston
right.
E
That
was
the
first
thing
that
this
committee
talked
about.
First
thing
that
asked
to
be
put
before
council
and
and
message
received:
we've
actually
got
money
budgeted
and
I
suspect,
after
we
go
through
these
conversations
about
three
by
three.
There
will
be
more
money
budgeted
for
comprehensive
water
management
plans
for
putting
out
there
literally
on
a
white
board,
a
list
of
priority
projects
and
getting
them
moving
forward.
Bob
you
were
on
the
call
the
other
night
so
was
dale.
I
think
a
few
other
others
of
you
were
for
me.
E
There's
a
lot
of
politics
coming
in
this.
But
for
me,
as
we
move
forward
whatever
dollars,
we
commit
to
three
by
three:
we
have
to
commit
an
equal
and
like
amount
of
dollars
to
other
projects
like
calhoun
west,
so
we
don't
suck
the
life
out
of
all
the
other
things
that
are
out
there
and
it's
not
just
calvin
west.
There
are
other
parts
of
the
city,
and
you
know,
council
member
waring
represents
a
whole
different
area
of
the
city
and
I'll.
Let
him
weigh
in
that.
E
We
have
to
make
sure
that
we
pay
attention
to,
and
don't
just
let
all
of
this,
not
just
monetary,
but
in
terms
of
of
available
human
resources
in
planning,
going
forward
to
build
infrastructure
for
water
management
and-
and
that's
you
know,
it's
a
lot
of
words,
but
in
the
end
it
has
to
be
integrated.
We
have
to
set
forward
and
do
it
together
and
we
have
to
have
funding
partners
one
of
the
things
that
councilmember
wearing
I'm
going
to
step
aside.
Let
him
talk
next,
we
did
a
lot
of
talking
last
night.
E
One
of
the
things
that
I
think
he
has
very
appropriately
pointed
out
is:
we
need
to
include
other
potential
funding
partners,
whether
it's
army
corps
of
engineers,
three
by
three
study,
whether
it's
calhoun
west,
or
whether
it's
other
large-scale
water
management
projects,
they're
in
the
city
of
charleston,
in
the
county
of
charleston
and
in
the
state
of
south
carolina
and
by
the
way
in
the
united
states.
But
let's
sort
of
go
closer
to
home.
We've
got
to
get
the
county
involved
in
these
conversations,
a
calhoun
west
project
is
most
likely
eligible
for.
E
We
were
on
our
way
to
designing
it
and
it
just
got
put
on
the
shelf
once
it's
designed,
we
go
sell
it.
We
can
go
out
there
in
the
market
and
sell
it,
but
we
can't
until
it's
designed
so
probably
a
longer
answer
than
you
wanted
and
and
councilmember
waring.
I
know
you're
out
there.
If
you
want
to
jump
in,
please
do
so.
C
Well,
great,
so
bob.
I
hope
that
answers
your
question,
so
I
agree
with
you.
You
know
my
focus
is
on
water
and
it
isn't
just
tide
or
surge.
It's
all
the
water
threats
we
have
so
again.
I
do
think
there
is
a
an
amount
of
synergy
that
we
can
get
between
harder
perimeter
around
the
peninsula,
of
whatever
form
in
town
midwest.
C
There
will
be
efficiencies
gained
then,
and
the
cost
of
calhoun
west
with
a
hard
structure,
a
harder
structure,
hardwood
mirror,
will
will
be
less
than
the
cost
of
calvin
with
west
without
that,
so
there
is
a
multiple,
multiple
benefit
goal
here.
One
other
thing
that
I
would
add
is
some
of
the
information.
C
So
there
will
be
an
efficiency
of
that
money
spent
with
the
feds
are
paying
two-thirds
of
the
cost
of
those
studies
and
we're
paying
one-third
of
those
those
study.
The
results
of
those
studies
will
be
ours
because
we
will
have
co-pay
for
them
and
that
will
benefit
the
city,
no
matter
what
else
it
does
going
forward
on
the
peninsula.
C
So
I
hope
that
talks
and
then,
if
you
want,
I
have,
I
just
have
three
other
short
items
here.
I
just
want
to
update
you
on
about
the
water
plan
and
rosemont
and
about
nature-based
features,
but
I
still
think
if
your
questions
about
this
and
what
we
talked
about
in
this
process
stepwise
process
with
report,
I'm
happy
to
answer
those
and
tell
you
what
I
know.
B
B
You
know
we're
meeting
schedules
once
a
month
as
it's
currently
set
and
so
caleb
will
be
sending
an
email
again
with
those
details
so
susan
for
the
next
meeting,
susan,
please.
That
said,
please
go
ahead
with
your
question
yeah!
I
just
wanted
to
ask
dale.
I
know
that
the
city
has
to
write
a
letter
of
financial
certification
and
it's
sort
of
been
vague,
exactly
how
much
has
to
be
explained
about
where
the
money
is
going
to
come
from.
C
So
there
is
yes,
so
this
to
finish
the
study.
This
thing
we
need
to
do.
The
mayor
needs
to
do
quickly
to
allow
the
corps
to
finish.
It
requires
a
letter
of
support,
and
that
can
be
a
one
sense
thing.
We
support
finishing
the
study.
It
requires
a
letter
of
self
financial
self
certification.
Cfo
has
to
sign
that
bob
haybing
vetted
that
for
you
all
in
the
in
the
fall.
The
last
sentence
of
this
says
very
clearly.
There
is
no.
C
C
Once
you
get
to
the
design
agreement,
then
there
is
a.
There
is
another
letter
of
financial
self-certification
that
says
yes,
and
if
we
move
forward
and
pursuant
to
the
design
agreement,
we
have
the
wherewithal
to
meet
our
obligations
under
it.
So
that
is
another
letter
of
self-certification
that
comes
when
we
do
the
design
agreement
in
nine
months
or
a
year,
and
then.
C
Okay
and
then
council
will
say
yep
next
year,
we're
gonna,
they
requested
two
and
a
half
million
bucks
for
these
studies.
Here's
your
two
and
a
half
million
or
sorry
we're
unhappy
with
you
guys
or
we
have
a.
We
have
a
financial
crisis
and
we're
not
funding
it
next
year,
again
to
not
fund
it
in
once,
you're
in
ped
and
to
not
fund
it.
The
next
year
there's
no
financial
penalty,
the
ped
just
gets
paused
for
that
period.
Okay.
Does
that
help.
C
Right
again,
we
have
the
we've.
Given
you
the
outlines
of
a
financial
plan
for
ped.
We
think
this
is
doable
construction,
that's
a
difference!
That's
a
different
thing!
We're
starting
to
you
know
we
have
a
strategy
for
that
where
we
think
the
money
could
come
from.
We
don't
have
that
money
in
the
bank,
but
but
once
we
get
into
ped
and
we
after
year
one
we
were
confident
that
okay
yeah
yeah,
we
are
making
progress
yeah
this.
C
This
feels
okay,
we're
going
to
very
clearly
start
to
talk
with
the
county
and
the
state
and
folks
who
do
resilience,
bonds
and
other
sort
of
sources
to
create
the
financial
stack.
Okay,
but
you
know
we.
We
have
to
start
ahead
to
see
if
we're
happy
with
the
core
again,
and
I
I'm
confident
that
they're
they're
going
to
be
a
willing
partner
and
to
do
right
by
us,
but
until.
B
B
C
B
C
Just
three
things-
and
I
can
talk
offline
with
you-
one-
the
water
plan,
I'm
starting
to
work
on
the
scope,
srw
scope
of
work
for
the
water
plant
talking
with
various
folks
trying
to
get
a
procured.
We
hope
to
have
something
procured
by
may.
It
takes
a
while
right
to
do
all
this
to
go
through
the
competition
and
the
rfp
process,
so
our
rfp
process,
so
that
is
underway.
C
Two
is
I've
been
having
discussions.
We've
been
having
discussions
with
folks
up
in
rosemont
herbert
can
voucher
that
we
are
trying
to
move
forward
with
the
rosemont
resilience
plan,
it's
a
bit
of
a
puzzle,
but
we're
trying
to
work
through
those
puzzle,
pieces
and
put
them
together.
So
that
has
our
attention.
C
Finally,
and
very
encouragingly,
the
army
corps
district
here
and
currently
honest
general
kelly.
They
heard
us
clearly
about
more
nature-based
features.
They
called
the
head
of
the
engineering
with
nature
program.
Todd
for
the
army
corps
of
engineers
said:
what
do
you
think
I
shared
with
you
all
some
of
the
podcasts
that
he
has
put
out
about
how
he
thinks
policies
should
change
and
practices
must
change.
C
C
B
A
Thank
you,
kate.
Thank
you,
dale
for
the
report.
I
heard
you
say
in
the
latter
part
of
the
presentation
you
were
going
to
like
give
some
sort
of
update
as
to
what
had
been
discussed.
As
far
as
rose
mount
is
concerned,
I
read
the
report,
the
six
page
report
and
I
looked
at
the
video
where
it
came
to
structural
and
non-structural
flood
proofing,
wet
proofing
and
all
that
good
stuff
and
whatnot,
and
I
don't
it
it
it
isn't.
A
With
that
with
that
approach,
and
if
the,
if
you
had
in
your
discussions
with
all
involved,
came
up
with
something
different
or
or
you
can
enlighten
me,
so
I
can
enlighten
them
as
to
what
we
can
look
at
as
far
as
the
data
research
that
we're
doing
to
present
to
this
committee
to
present
to
the
army
corps
to
like
bring
about
some
sense
of
a
better
sense
of
mitigation
for
rosemount.
I
would
appreciate
getting
together
with
you
because
it
would
help.
C
Okay,
so
briefly,
herbert
we've
discussed
about
the
resilience
plan
and
how
that
would
inform
what
we
would
do
right
on
with
the
rosemont
community.
So
we
think
there
is.
There
are
various
needs
up
there.
It's
not
just
surge.
How
do
we
manage
that
and
the
community
has
to
be
involved
in
what
it
will
accept?
The
army
corps
process
says:
okay,
just
the
surge,
we're
willing
to
pay
for
elevation
for
non-structural
things
we
have
to
see
if
that
is
acceptable.
C
That
is
something
we're
going
to
pursue
in
this
in
this
in
this
rosemary
experience
plan.
If
that
is
acceptable,
what
the
city
believes
and
we've
communicated
this,
and
it
is
in
the
last
one
of
the
last
sentences
of
the
document
I
sent
you.
It
says
something
like
we
will
pursue
additional
flood
proofing
or
non-structural
improvements
for
the
area,
because,
whatever
the
because
there
isn't
the
infrastructure
there
to
support
it,
what
that
means
is
so
again.
C
The
idea
here
is
you
elevate
the
homes
in
rosemont
that
are
below
12
feet,
to
12
feet
in
your
lake
to
utilities
and
put
ramps
in
for
all
that.
That's
the
idea
you
have
to
design
that
in
pad,
but
it
is
my
opinion
that
if
you're
behind
a
12-foot
wall
and
one
foot
of
water
gets
over,
then
you
know
you
have
a
foot
of
water
in
your
street.
So
susan
has
a
float
of
water
in
her
street.
Just
use
an
example.
C
Well,
that's
that's
bad,
but
in
rosemont,
if
you
have,
if
you're
elevated
to
12
feet
and
you
have
13
feet
of
water-
well,
the
bottom
of
your
house-
even
it's
elevated-
now
has
water
on
it.
So
we
think
there
should
be
additional
flood
proofing
added
to
the
bottom
of
those
structures.
So
you
get
a
higher
level
of
protection.
C
Those
are
things
that
you
would
impede
based
upon
the
outcome
of
what
the
rosemont
brazil.
If
the
community
says
you
know,
we
don't
want
non-structural.
We
want
to
do
something
else,
and
you
and
I
discussed
the
various
options
there.
Then
that
is
what
we
will
pursue
in
ped
with
with
them.
But
again
the
rosemary
resilience
plan
will
feed
how
we
approach
rosemont
in
pets
that
helpful.
B
B
I
just
sent
out
an
email
and
see
people's
interests
and
availability.
I
will
add
the
the
council
meeting
schedule
has
now
gone
to
the
same
week
that
we
go
so
I
may
look
for
our
council
members.
I
know
it's
difficult
to
have
a
meeting
first
thing
in
the
morning
after
after
a
long
council
mate,
so
we
may
swap
our
our
weeks
and
see
if
that
works
for
folks.
E
E
C
B
Well,
I
will
send
out
an
email,
and
maybe
if
I
need
to
do
a
poll,
if
folks
want
to
do
more
than
one
meeting,
if
not,
I
will
just
send
out
an
email
as
eyeing
that
that
week
for
our
next
meeting,
but
I
can
send
out
some
dates
too
and
we'll
get
consensus
on
that.
That'll
be
good,
because
I
it's
it's
unclear
how
how
things
are
proceeding.
I
think
we
need
to
know.