By Michael Coughlin Jr.
Late last month, the Planning Department hosted another public meeting regarding the Chain Forge Building — Building 105 in the Navy Yard — which is undergoing a new process to redevelop the site after the previously planned project, which would have brought a hotel and other amenities, fell through.
At the beginning of the meeting, Yoon Cha, a Real Estate Development Officer at the Planning Department, reviewed the disposition process, which includes developing and releasing a request for proposal (RFP), and provided a short recap of the previous meeting held in September.
September’s meeting was covered in the September 19th edition of the Patriot-Bridge, and the meeting recording can be viewed at https://www.bostonplans.org/planning-zoning/planning-initiatives/chain-forge-building-105-disposition-planning.
Additionally, Cha highlighted some of the comments from September’s meeting regarding what residents would like to see at the property. Comments ranged from folks wanting to see a mix of uses to space for art, sports recreation, a grocery store, a hotel, and more.
“There’s a lot of excitement to see something happen here and a tremendous amount of support, which we so appreciate, and we had some really interesting ideas,” said Cha.
After taking these comments, Cha indicated they grouped them into three categories: neighborhood needs, community and recreation, and important considerations.
In the first two categories, ideas such as having a restaurant or cultural space at the site were listed, while the important considerations category listed items such as parking availability and historic preservation.
Cha explained that the Planning Department had created development objectives for the RFP through the three abovementioned categories, which came from community feedback.
“The first step of the RFP is to come up with the goal. So, that is what’s called the development objectives. So, this is kind of like what we want to see on this property,” said Cha.
The four development objectives listed were to have a mixed-use adaptation, historic preservation, public destination, and resilient design.
Finally, Cha then outlined the next steps for drafting the RFP, which includes creating development and urban design guidelines — how goals will be met — and comparative evaluation criteria — how future proposals will be evaluated against one another.
Following the conversation about the RFP process, it was time to discuss the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Brownfields clean-up grant, which the planning department is applying for to help with funding to clean-up the site.
Paul Uzgiris, a Remediation Lead at Weston & Sampson involved with the grant process, discussed the work that had previously occurred at the site.
He explained that initial site investigations and remedial activities, including the abatement of asbestos materials and removal of contaminated soils, occurred in the 1990s and early 2000s.
In 2014 and 2015, Weston & Sampson got involved and performed supplemental investigations. “What all these investigations found was there’s contamination in building materials, concrete, soil, and groundwater at this site,” said Uzgiris.
He later said that the primary contaminants of concern were PCBs and dioxins in the soil and concrete.
“The EPA got involved due to the PCB contamination, and Weston & Sampson submitted a remediation plan on behalf of a developer that was involved in 2015 through 2020. The plan was subsequently approved by the EPA, and in 2018, approximately 100 pieces of equipment were cleaned, abated, and removed from the building,” said Uzgiris.
“There are remaining approximately 40 pieces of large equipment that were cleaned then wrapped with poly sheeting, but unfortunately, further clean-up plans were derailed during COVID. The developer was unable to secure additional funding, and they dropped out of the project, so the BPDA got involved and is now applying for this Brownfields clean-up grant to support the remediation efforts that’ll make it more attractive to a developer once the remedial efforts are complete.”
According to Uzgiris, the remediation project aims to reduce site risk for future redevelopment, remove contaminant exposure pathways, reduce development cost and uncertainty, and achieve regulatory closure through an activity and use limitation (AUL) that supports future redevelopment.
As part of this process, the EPA requires the completion of an analysis of Brownfields clean-up alternatives (ABCA).
Uzgiris analyzed and explained three alternatives. The first was no action, which he said was not very desirable.
Alternative two includes removing and off-site disposal of PCB-impacted building materials and soil and concrete with high PCB concentration. Additionally, this alternative would include the construction of a clean utility corridor and a four-inch concrete cap over the remediated soil and concrete areas. This alternative, estimated to cost around $4.5 million, would also include recording an AUL on the entire property.
Alternative three would be more comprehensive and would not require an AUL; however, it would cost about $20 million.
Ultimately, Uzgiris noted that the desired alternative is alternative two and that the grant application is due November 14th. He also indicated that funding would be awarded next fall.
Following this portion of the meeting, attendees briefly discussed everything presented before Cha closed the conversation.
In terms of the next steps, there are plans for more public meetings to discuss and review the RFP process in the coming months. For more information about the project and to view a recording of this meeting, visit the previously mentioned link.